FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2068783313> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2068783313 endingPage "284" @default.
• W2068783313 startingPage "276" @default.
• W2068783313 abstract "Statement of problem Whether splinting or not splinting adjacent implants together can optimize the stress/strain transfer to the supporting structures remains controversial. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the photoelasticity and digital image correlation (DIC) in analyzing the stresses/strains transferred by an implant-supported prosthesis. Material and methods A polymethylmethacrylate model was made with a combination of acrylic resin replicas of a mandibular first premolar and second molar and threaded implants replacing the second premolar and first molar. Splinted (G1/G3) and nonsplinted (G2/G4) metal-ceramic screw-retained crowns were loaded with (G1/G2) and without (G3/G4) the presence of the second molar. Vertical static loads were applied to the first molar implant-supported crown (50 N-photoelasticity; 250 N-DIC). The resulting isochromatic fringes in the photoelastic models were photographed, and a single-camera 2-dimensional DIC system recorded the deformation at the surface of the resin models. Results Residual stresses were present in the photoelastic model after screw fixation of the crowns. The following average photoelastic stress results (MPa) were found around the loaded implant: G1 (20.06), G2 (23.49), G3 (30.86), G4 (37.64). Horizontal strains (εxx, %) between the molars averaged over the length of the loaded implant were found by DIC: G1 (0.08 ±0.09), G2 (0.13 ±0.10), G3 (0.13 ±0.11), G4 (0.16 ±0.11). Splinted crowns transferred lower stresses to the supporting bone when the second molar was absent. The second molar optimized the stress distribution between the supporting structures even for nonsplinted restorations. Conclusions Both methods presented similar results and seemed capable of indicating where issues associated with stress/strain concentrations might arise. However, DIC, while apparently less sensitive than photoelasticity, is not restricted to the use of light-polarizing materials. Whether splinting or not splinting adjacent implants together can optimize the stress/strain transfer to the supporting structures remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the photoelasticity and digital image correlation (DIC) in analyzing the stresses/strains transferred by an implant-supported prosthesis. A polymethylmethacrylate model was made with a combination of acrylic resin replicas of a mandibular first premolar and second molar and threaded implants replacing the second premolar and first molar. Splinted (G1/G3) and nonsplinted (G2/G4) metal-ceramic screw-retained crowns were loaded with (G1/G2) and without (G3/G4) the presence of the second molar. Vertical static loads were applied to the first molar implant-supported crown (50 N-photoelasticity; 250 N-DIC). The resulting isochromatic fringes in the photoelastic models were photographed, and a single-camera 2-dimensional DIC system recorded the deformation at the surface of the resin models. Residual stresses were present in the photoelastic model after screw fixation of the crowns. The following average photoelastic stress results (MPa) were found around the loaded implant: G1 (20.06), G2 (23.49), G3 (30.86), G4 (37.64). Horizontal strains (εxx, %) between the molars averaged over the length of the loaded implant were found by DIC: G1 (0.08 ±0.09), G2 (0.13 ±0.10), G3 (0.13 ±0.11), G4 (0.16 ±0.11). Splinted crowns transferred lower stresses to the supporting bone when the second molar was absent. The second molar optimized the stress distribution between the supporting structures even for nonsplinted restorations. Both methods presented similar results and seemed capable of indicating where issues associated with stress/strain concentrations might arise. However, DIC, while apparently less sensitive than photoelasticity, is not restricted to the use of light-polarizing materials." @default.
• W2068783313 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5037070300 @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5042878754 @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5049031335 @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5051762060 @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5051777477 @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5078879132 @default.
• W2068783313 creator A5085081601 @default.
• W2068783313 date "2014-08-01" @default.
• W2068783313 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2068783313 title "Comparison of the correlation of photoelasticity and digital imaging to characterize the load transfer of implant-supported restorations" @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1567986010 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1581973175 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1582147968 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1892261961 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1975079787 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1983495118 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W1984632371 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2025458765 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2026587652 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2028925336 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2034417751 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2035252118 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2035797778 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2052174463 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2066905246 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2073825804 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2108904209 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2113710887 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2114659296 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2116264753 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2119658273 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2124237240 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2158346989 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W2314315494 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W4252657271 @default.
• W2068783313 cites W4293772180 @default.
• W2068783313 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.09.029" @default.
• W2068783313 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24461947" @default.
• W2068783313 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2068783313 type Work @default.
• W2068783313 sameAs 2068783313 @default.
• W2068783313 citedByCount "20" @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132014 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132015 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132016 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132017 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132018 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132020 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132021 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132022 @default.
• W2068783313 countsByYear W20687833132023 @default.
• W2068783313 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5037070300 @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5042878754 @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5049031335 @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5051762060 @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5051777477 @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5078879132 @default.
• W2068783313 hasAuthorship W2068783313A5085081601 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C115635565 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C159985019 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C199343813 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C202271784 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C2778400979 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C2780641865 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C2781411149 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C29694066 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C32209669 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C500666722 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C62836269 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConcept C73753567 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C115635565 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C141071460 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C159985019 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C192562407 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C199343813 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C202271784 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C2778400979 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C2780641865 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C2781411149 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C29694066 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C32209669 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C500666722 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C62836269 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C71924100 @default.
• W2068783313 hasConceptScore W2068783313C73753567 @default.
• W2068783313 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2068783313 hasLocation W20687833131 @default.
• W2068783313 hasLocation W20687833132 @default.
• W2068783313 hasOpenAccess W2068783313 @default.
• W2068783313 hasPrimaryLocation W20687833131 @default.
• W2068783313 hasRelatedWork W2068783313 @default.
• W2068783313 hasRelatedWork W2239929171 @default.

• next