Different fabrication techniques of implant-supported prostheses: Microhardness and fracture strength

0Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aim: This study evaluated the mechanical behavior of implant-supported crowns obtained by different fabrication technique after thermomechanical cycling. Methods: Thirtytwo external hexagon dental implants were divided into four groups (n=10): CC - conventional casting with torch; EI - electromagnetic induction casting; PL - plasma casting; and CAD-CAM - milling through computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing. Vickers microhardness of the specimens were made before and after the thermomechanical cycling, and then subjected to fracture load. Fracture pattern was evaluated. Results: No significant difference was observed comparing the microhardness before and after thermomechanical cycling. CAD-CAM group presented significant lower microhardness than the other groups. No significant statistical difference was showed on fracture load between the groups. The CAD-CAM and PL presented lower number of failure by plastic deformation. Conclusion: The manufacturing techniques affected the mechanical behavior and the failure pattern of implant-supported crowns tested.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Borges, S. M., Poole, S. F., Moris, F. I. C. M., Spazzin, A. O., Lapria Faria, A. C., & Gomes, E. A. (2019). Different fabrication techniques of implant-supported prostheses: Microhardness and fracture strength. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences, 18. https://doi.org/10.20396/BJOS.V18I0.8657254

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free