Comparison of the Morse Cone Connection with the Internal Hexagon and External Hexagon Connections Based on Microleakage - Review.

Q4 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Ana Beatriz Bueno Carlini Bittencourt, Clóvis Lamartine de Moraes Melo Neto, Paulo Augusto Penitente, Eduardo Piza Pellizzer, Daniela Micheline Dos Santos, Marcelo Coelho Goiato
{"title":"Comparison of the Morse Cone Connection with the Internal Hexagon and External Hexagon Connections Based on Microleakage - Review.","authors":"Ana Beatriz Bueno Carlini Bittencourt,&nbsp;Clóvis Lamartine de Moraes Melo Neto,&nbsp;Paulo Augusto Penitente,&nbsp;Eduardo Piza Pellizzer,&nbsp;Daniela Micheline Dos Santos,&nbsp;Marcelo Coelho Goiato","doi":"10.14712/23362936.2021.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The gap formed at the abutment-implant interface brings about a bacterial colonization. In addition, a bacterial reservoir can be established within the implant. The build-up of microorganisms around the implant can cause soft tissue infections and bone loss around the implant, which can lead to implant failure. Our literature review aimed to evaluate the infiltration at the implant-abutment interface, comparing the Morse cone connection with the external hexagon and internal hexagon connections. A literature search using the PubMed database was performed on March 24, 2021. The search terms were combinations of \"Morse cone\" or \"Morse taper\" with each of the following terms (individually): \"microleakage\", \"leakage\", \"infiltration\", and \"penetration\". The inclusion criterion was in vitro studies comparing the Morse cone with the external hexagon and/or internal hexagon, based on infiltration at the implant-abutment interface. The exclusion criterion was the evaluation of microleakage at the implant-abutment interface after applying a sealant over this region. The search was expanded as needed. There was no limit on the year of publication, and only articles written in English were included. In addition, references cited in included articles were also included in this review when they were appropriate. This literature review concluded that, in most cases, the microleakage in the Morse cone connection was lower when compared with the external hexagon and internal hexagon connections.</p>","PeriodicalId":35490,"journal":{"name":"Prague medical report","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prague medical report","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23362936.2021.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

The gap formed at the abutment-implant interface brings about a bacterial colonization. In addition, a bacterial reservoir can be established within the implant. The build-up of microorganisms around the implant can cause soft tissue infections and bone loss around the implant, which can lead to implant failure. Our literature review aimed to evaluate the infiltration at the implant-abutment interface, comparing the Morse cone connection with the external hexagon and internal hexagon connections. A literature search using the PubMed database was performed on March 24, 2021. The search terms were combinations of "Morse cone" or "Morse taper" with each of the following terms (individually): "microleakage", "leakage", "infiltration", and "penetration". The inclusion criterion was in vitro studies comparing the Morse cone with the external hexagon and/or internal hexagon, based on infiltration at the implant-abutment interface. The exclusion criterion was the evaluation of microleakage at the implant-abutment interface after applying a sealant over this region. The search was expanded as needed. There was no limit on the year of publication, and only articles written in English were included. In addition, references cited in included articles were also included in this review when they were appropriate. This literature review concluded that, in most cases, the microleakage in the Morse cone connection was lower when compared with the external hexagon and internal hexagon connections.

基于微泄漏的莫尔斯锥内六边形连接与外六边形连接的比较
在基牙-种植体界面处形成的间隙导致细菌定植。此外,可以在植入物内建立细菌储存库。种植体周围微生物的积聚会导致种植体周围的软组织感染和骨质流失,从而导致种植体失败。我们的文献综述旨在评估种植体-基台界面的浸润情况,并将莫尔斯锥连接与外六边形连接和内六边形连接进行比较。于2021年3月24日使用PubMed数据库进行文献检索。搜寻关键词是“莫尔斯锥”或“莫尔斯锥”与以下词语的组合:“微渗漏”、“渗漏”、“渗透”及“渗透”。纳入标准是基于种植体-基台界面的浸润情况,将Morse锥体与外六边形和/或内六边形进行比较的体外研究。排除标准是在种植体-基台界面涂抹密封剂后评估该区域的微泄漏。根据需要扩大了搜索范围。没有出版年份的限制,只包括用英语写的文章。此外,纳入文章中引用的参考文献在适当的时候也被纳入本综述。本文献综述认为,在大多数情况下,与外六边形和内六边形连接相比,莫尔斯锥连接的微泄漏更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Prague medical report
Prague medical report Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信