dc.creator | Fernández Asián, Ignacio Rafael | es |
dc.creator | Martínez-González, Álvaro-José | es |
dc.creator | Torres-Lagares, Daniel | es |
dc.creator | Serrera Figallo, María de los Ángeles | es |
dc.creator | Gutiérrez Pérez, José Luis | es |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-14T17:20:19Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-09-14T17:20:19Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-10-15 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Fernández Asián, I.R., Martínez-González, Á., Torres-Lagares, D., Serrera Figallo, M.d.l.Á. y Gutiérrez Pérez, J.L. (2019). External Connection Versus Internal Connection in Dental Implantology. A Mechanical In Vitro Study. Metals, 9 (10), 1106. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2075-4701 | es |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/101089 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: In today’s dentistry, implantology has become a therapeutic resource of
choice in certain clinical situations. The design of implants has evolved in several aspects since their
inception. Dental implants were initially designed with an external hex connection, although due
to force transmission and security in the adjustment of the prosthesis, later implants featured an
internal hex connection. This study aims to analyse the mechanical properties of two types of
implants (an internal connection and an external connection) from the same manufacturer and their
different prosthetic components (union screw between implant and prosthetic abutment, and the
abutment itself) when subjected to different types of load. (2) Materials and methods: Intraosseous
dental implants of similar shape, design and size, although different in type of connection (external
vs. internal), were studied. The specifications of the UNI EN ISO 14801 test standard were used,
with all determinations being carried out three times. Finally, the dimensional characterisation of
the samples analysed after the dynamic load study was carried out, and the values of both study
groups were compared by means of the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test to find statistically
significant differences (p < 0.05). (3) Results: For the static characterisation test, we found between
610.9 N and 986.1 N for the external connection and between 1263.6 N and 1324 N for the internal
connection (p = 0.011). All of the dynamic load tests were positive and there was no failure in any
of the components studied. (4) Conclusions: After the analysis of the samples studied in vitro,
satisfactory results were obtained, demonstrating that both connections can support considerable
mechanical loads according to international standards (UNI EN ISO 14801). | es |
dc.format | application/pdf | es |
dc.format.extent | 10 | es |
dc.language.iso | eng | es |
dc.publisher | MDPI | es |
dc.relation.ispartof | Metals, 9 (10), 1106. | |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Mechanical analysis | es |
dc.subject | Dental implant | es |
dc.subject | Internal connection | es |
dc.subject | External connection | es |
dc.title | External Connection Versus Internal Connection in Dental Implantology. A Mechanical In Vitro Study | es |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | es |
dcterms.identifier | https://ror.org/03yxnpp24 | |
dc.type.version | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | es |
dc.rights.accessRights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | es |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Universidad de Sevilla. Departamento de Estomatología | es |
dc.relation.publisherversion | https://doi.org/10.3390/met9101106 | es |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.3390/met9101106 | es |
dc.journaltitle | Metals | es |
dc.publication.volumen | 9 | es |
dc.publication.issue | 10 | es |
dc.publication.initialPage | 1106 | es |