Analysis of primary stability of dental implants inserted in different substrates using the pullout test and insertion torque

The aim of the study was to evaluate mechanical behavior of implants inserted in three substrates, by measuring the pullout strength and the relative stiffness. 32 implants (Master Porous-Conexao, cylindrical, external hexagon, and surface treatment) were divided into 4 groups (n = 8): pig rib bone, polyurethane Synbone, polyurethane Nacional 40 PCF, and pinus wood. Implants were installed with the exact distance of 5 mm of another implant. The insertion torque (N·cm) was quantified using the digital Kratos torque meter and the pullout test (N) was performed by an axial traction force toward the long axis of the implant (2 min/mm) through mount implant devices attached to a piece adapted to a load cell of 200 Kg of a universal testing machine (Emic DL10000). Data of insertion torque and maximum pullout force were submitted to one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni tests (α = 0.05). Polyurethane Nacional 40 PCF and pinus wood showed the highest values of insertion torque and pullout force, with significant statistical difference (P < 0.05) with other groups. The analysis showed stiffness materials with the highest values for primary stability. © 2013 Nathalia Ferraz Oliscovicz et al.

The effect of adhesive systems on the pullout strength of a fiberglass-reinforced composite post system in bovine teeth

Purpose: To evaluate the pullout strength of a glass fiber-reinforced composite post (glass FRC) cemented with three different adhesive systems and one resin cement. The null hypothesis was that pullout strengths yielded by the adhesive systems are similar. Materials and Methods: Thirty bovine teeth were selected. The size of the specimens was standardized at 16 mm by sectioning off the coronal portion and part of the root. The specimens were divided into three groups, according to the adhesive system, which were applied following the manufacturers' instructions: G1, ScotchBond Multi-Purpose Plus; G2, Single Bond; G3, Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus. The glass FRCs (Reforpost) were etched with 37% H3PO4 for 1 min and silanized (Porcelain Primer). Thereafter, they were cemented with the dual resin cement En-Force. The specimens were stored for 24 h, attached to an adapted device, and submitted to the pullout test in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). The data were submitted to the one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Results: G1 (30.2 ± 5.8 Kgf) displayed the highest pullout strength (p < 0.001) when compared to G2 (18.6 ± 5.8 Kgf) and G3 (14.3 ± 5.8 Kgf), which were statistically similar. Analysis of the specimens revealed that all failures occurred between the adhesive system and the root dentin (pullout of the post cement), regardless of group. Conclusion: The multiple-bottle, total-etch adhesive system provided higher pullout strength of the glass FRC when compared to the single-bottle, total-etch, and single-step self-etching adhesive systems. The null hypothesis was rejected (p < 0.001).

Avaliação da resistência ao arrancamento de mini-implantes ortodônticos: estudo laboratorial

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Estudo para determinação de uma metodologia para o ensaio de arrancamento que avalia aderência aço/concreto

This work talks about the importance of the steel adhesion to concrete, reinforced concrete structures, their testing and forms of measurement used and how the results are used in the structural design, which uses as a reference the NBR 6118 and NBR 7480. It also deals with the importance of a reliable assessment, discussing failures that the test used, NBR 7477, features in specific circumstances, as discussed under the EC-094. It also presents an initial proposal for simplified pullout test, which aims to analyze the grip on steel bars with diameter less than 10 mm, which results when used standardized testing by ABNT NBT 7477, has shown excessive variability, the main criticism of the trial today used without distinction to be established thick or thin bars. The proposal also presented methodology is in the consolidation phase, given the time and the volume of necessary tests. For this reason it is not possible to make a comparison between the values obtained and the results of the test used on the basis of the standard in force, this can only be done once the front with a continuation of this work