Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Article in English | IMSEAR | ID: sea-158295

ABSTRACT

Aims: The aim was to assess the prevalence of oral lesions in HIV‑infected children undergoing highly active anti‑retroviral therapy (HAART), and the association between the duration of HAART usage and oral lesions. Subjects and Methods: Totally, 111 medical and dental records of HIV‑infected children, aged from 2 to 16 years old were reviewed for medical data, presence of oral lesions, and caries prevalence. According to the type of medication, the children were grouped as follows: 51 were under HAART (G1), 46 were using anti‑retroviral medication (G2), and 14 were using no medication (G3). Results: The majority of the HIV children had AIDS (65.8%), of which 86.3% were in G1, 63% in G2, and 0% in G3. The mean length of therapy was 34.4 months, with no difference between groups (Kruskal–Wallis; P = 0.917). The prevalence of the oral lesions was 23.4%, namely, G1 was 27.5%, G2 was 21.7%, and G3 was 14.3% (P > 0.05). Gingivitis was the most common oral manifestation (15.3%) seen in the three groups, followed by gingival linear erythema and pseudomembranous candidiasis in G1 and G2. The mean values regarding deft and DMFT indexes were, respectively, 3.2 and 1.9 (G1), 2.8 and 1.6 (G2), and 3.8 and 3.0 (G3). For the patients without AIDS (n = 38), oral manifestations were seen in 29.4% of G2 compared to G1, with 0% (Chi‑square; P > 0.05). In terms of therapy duration, 47.65% of the patients who had been under HAART for 18 months or less had oral manifestations, compared to 13.3% of those who had been treated for a longer time (Chi‑square; P = 0.007). Conclusions: Although the prevalence of oral lesions was similar between the groups, it was less in patients without AIDS and those under HAART. The duration of HAART usage had a significant influence on the prevalence of these lesions.


Subject(s)
Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active , Child , Child, Preschool , HIV , Humans , Mouth Diseases/epidemiology , Mouth Diseases/drug therapy , Oral Manifestations/epidemiology , Oral Manifestations/drug therapy , Prevalence
2.
RGO (Porto Alegre) ; 62(4): 357-364, Oct-Dec/2014. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-741685

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the primary stability of dental implants with and without surface treatment, by means of resonance frequency, using different materials as substitutes for human bone substrates for insertion. METHODS: Sixteen external hexagon, cylindrical Conexão(r) titanium implants were used, 11.5 mm long by 3.75 mm wide, as follows: 8 Master Porous (MP), with surface treatment and 8 Master Screw (MS) machined. The implant placement was performed on the following substrates: pork rib bone, wood, artificial bone polyurethane National(r) (40, 20, 15 PCF) and Synbone(r). Primary stability was assessed via resonance frequency using an Osstell Mentor(tm) device. Data were analyzed statistically using ANOVA and Tukey's test, with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: It was found that although MP and MS have a higher value on all substrates, these were not statistically different between groups (p>0.05), except for polyurethane National(r) 20 PCF. When inserted into the wood substrate and polyurethane National(r) 40 PCF, MP and MS had higher values​​. MP, when inserted into the pig bone, was also statistically equal to these interactions. CONCLUSION: Despite the continuous development of innovations in the characteristics of implant surfaces to assist with the performance of osseointegrated implants, and the fact that our study has found that the surface treatment had no impact on the primary stability checked using ressonance frequency, there is still very little scientific understanding of these effects. .


OBJETIVO: Analisar a estabilidade primária de implantes odontológicos com tratamento e sem tratamento de superfície, por meio da frequência de ressonância, utilizando diferentes materiais como substratos substitutos do osso humano para sua inserção. MÉTODOS: Foram utilizados 16 implantes de titânio Conexão(r), cilíndricos, hexágono externo, com 11,5 mm de comprimento e 3,75 mm de largura, sendo: 8 Master Porous, com tratamento de superfície; e 8 Master Screw, usinados. A instalação de implantes foi realizada nos seguintes substratos: osso de costela suína, madeira, osso artificial de poliuretana da marca Nacional(r) (40, 20 e 15 PCF) e da marca Synbone(r). Foi avaliada a estabilidade primária através da frequência de ressonância utilizando o aparelho Osstell(tm) Mentor. Os dados obtidos foram submetidos a tratamento estatístico ANOVA e Teste de Tukey, com nível de significância a 5%. RESULTADOS: Foi constatado que, apesar de Master Porous apresentar maior valor que Master Screw em todos os substratos, estes não apresentaram diferença estatística entre si (p>0,05), com exceção da poliuretana Nacional(r) de 20 PCF. Quando inseridos no substrato madeira e na poliuretana Nacional(r) 40 PCF, Master Porous e Master Screw tiveram maiores valores. Master Porous, quando inserido no osso suíno também foram iguais estatisticamente a estas interações. CONCLUSÃO: Apesar de inovações nas características das superfícies de implantes serem desenvolvidas constantemente para contribuir no desempenho de implantes osseointegrados, e nosso estudo encontrar que não houve influência do tratamento de superfície na estabilidade primária aferida por frequência de ressonância; ainda há pouco conhecimento científico sobre esses efeitos. .

3.
Braz. j. oral sci ; 12(3): 158-163, July-Sept. 2013. ilus, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-701299

ABSTRACT

AIM: To evaluate the influence of the format and surface treatment of implants, as well as the substrate used in primary stability. METHODS: Thirty-two Conexão® implants were used: 8 conical (CC) (11.5 x 3.5 mm) and 24 cylindrical (11.5 x 3.75 mm) - 8 external hexagon implants without surface treatment (MS), 8 external hexagon implants with double Porous treatment (MP), 8 internal hexagon implants with Porous treatment (CA). They were inserted in Nacional® polyurethane in three densities (15, 20 and 40 PCF). The insertion torque (IT) (N.cm) was quantified using the digital Mackena® torque meter, and the pullout force (PF) (N) by means of axial traction force with a 200 kg load cell, performed in a Universal Test Machine (Emic® DL10000) and the Tesc 3.13 software. Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey's test with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: Difference was observed between groups (p<0.05). Regarding the IT, MP and MS inserted to the substrate 40PCF showed higher values with statistically significant difference with all interactions implants x substrate; the 15 and 20PCF densities was not significant in all groups of implants. MP, MS, CC and CA did not differ significantly, even inserted in a lower density, where CC showed better IT compared with other densities. For PF, the best performance was the interaction implant CA x 40PCF substrate, showing a difference from the other implants inserted in all substrates. CONCLUSIONS: The higher bone density and cylindrical implants with surface treatment provides greater IT and PF.


Subject(s)
Humans , Biomechanical Phenomena , Bone Density , Dental Implants , Polyurethanes , Bone Substitutes
4.
Rev. odontol. UNESP (Online) ; 42(4): 283-290, jul.-ago. 2013. ilus, tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS, BBO | ID: lil-685542

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: A proposta do estudo foi avaliar a influência do formato e do tratamento de superfície na estabilidade primária de implantes odontológicos, inseridos em diferentes substratos, utilizando-se associação de métodos, como torque de inserção, resistência ao arrancamento e frequência de ressonância. Material e Método: Foram utilizados 32 implantes da marca Conexão® (Conexão Sistemas de Prótese Ltda, Arujá, São Paulo, Brasil), sendo: oito cilíndricos com tratamento Porous (CA), oito cilíndricos usinados (MS), oito cilíndricos tratamento duplo Porous (MP) e oito cônicos sem tratamento (CC). Os substratos utilizados para inserção foram: costela de porco; poliuretana Synbone©; poliuretana Nacional® (15, 20, 40 PCF), e madeira. O torque de inserção (TI) foi quantificado utilizando-se um torquímetro digital Kratos®; a força de arrancamento (RA) foi aferida por meio de tração axial, realizada em uma Máquina Universal de Ensaios (Emic® DL-10000), e utilizou-se também análise por meio de frequência de ressonância (RF). Para obtenção dos resultados estatísticos, utilizou-se análise de variância e teste de Tukey (significância de 5%). Resultado: Ao analisar o torque de inserção, verificou-se que os implantes com tratamento de superfície não foram diferentes estatisticamente dos usinados, assim como os implantes cilíndricos não tiveram diferença dos cônicos em todos os substratos (p>0,05), com exceção da poliuretana Synbone©. Em relação à resistência ao arrancamento, os implantes tratados e usinados, assim como cônicos e cilíndricos, não tiveram diferença estatística (p>0,05); a análise de frequência de ressonância mostrou que não houve diferença entre os implantes (p>0,05), com exceção da poliuretana Nacional® (20 PCF). Conclusão: Os formatos e o tratamento de superfície estudados não demonstraram valores significantes quando foram comparados os implantes entre si e, considerando os substratos avaliados, não houve diferença estatística entre os diferentes tipos de implantes.


Objective: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the influence of the shape and surface treatment on the primary stability of dental implants inserted in different substrates through association methods such as insertion torque, pullout strength and resonance frequency. Material and Method: 32 implants were used with 8 cylindrical treatment Porous (CA), 8 machined cylindrical (MS), 8 cylinder dual treatment Porous (MP) and 8 tapered untreated (CC). The substrates used for inclusion were: pork rib; © Synbone polyurethane, polyurethane National ® (15, 20, 40 PCF) and wood. The insertion torque (TI) was quantified using a digital torque Kratos® wrench, the pullout strength (RA) was measured by means of axial traction performed in an Emic DL-10000® and analysis was also used by the resonance frequency (RF). To obtain the statistical results, we used analysis of variance and Tukey's test (5% significance). Result: To analyze the insertion torque, it was found that implants with surface treatment were not statistically different from machined as well as the cylindrical implants did not differ from tapered on all substrates (p>0.05), except © Synbone of polyurethane; in relation to RA, treated and machined implants as well as tapered and cylindrical, showed no statistical difference (p>0.05); FR analysis showed no difference between implants (p>0,05), with the exception of National® polyurethane (20 PCF). Conclusion: formats and surface treatment studied showed no significant values when compared implants together and considering the tested substrates showed no statistical difference between the different types of implants.


Subject(s)
In Vitro Techniques , Analysis of Variance , Osseointegration , Bone Substitutes , Torque , Dental Implantation
5.
Braz. dent. j ; 24(3): 213-217, May-Jun/2013. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-681860

ABSTRACT

This study evaluated the profile of implants subjected to torsion test. Four types of implants (Conexão®) were analyzed: Master Porous (MP - external hexagon, cylindrical, double-porous surface implants; 11.5 X 3.75 mm), Master Screw (MS - external hexagon, cylindrical, machined implants; 11.5 X 3.75 mm), Conect Conic (CC - external hexagon, cylindrical, machined implants; 11.5 X 3.5 mm) and Master Conect AR (CA - internal hexagon, cylindrical, double-porous surface implants; 11.5 X 3.75 mm). The Nikon® model C profile projector was used for the analysis before and after torsion test with a Mackena® model MK-20XX digital torque meter. The measures analyzed in the profile of implants were: diameter and height of the platform, diameter of the screw/platform connection, angle of the screw/platform connection, external diameter, internal diameter, thread pitch, height and length of the thread. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Tukey test at 5% significance level. The torsion test caused a visible deformity on the external implant profile. There was a statistical difference among the implants before and after torsion (p<0.05) for the variables: platform diameter, platform height, diameter of the screw/platform connection and length. Changes were observed in platform height of CC and CA, fracture of CA implants, fracture of the MP and MS assembler/connectors, and internal thread stripping of CC. Thus, it was concluded that excessive or some unadvised torque by the manufacturer can lead to changes in different geometric measurements of implants.


Este estudo avaliou o perfil de implantes submetidos à torção. Foram analisados quatro tipos de implantes (Conexão®): Master Porous (MP – implantes cilíndricos com encaixe hexagonal externo e superfície duplamente porosa; 11,5 X 3,75 mm), Master Screw (MS - implantes cilíndricos com encaixe hexagonal externo e superfície usinada; 11,5 X 3,75 mm), Conect Conic (CC - implantes cilíndricos com encaixe hexagonal externo e superfície usinada; 11,5 X 3,5 mm) e Master Conect AR (CA - implantes cilíndricos com encaixe hexagonal externo e superfície duplamente porosa). Utilizou-se para a análise o projetor de perfil Nikon® modelo C, antes e após o ensaio de torção, com torquímetro digital Mackena® modelo MK-20XX. As medidas analisadas do perfil dos implantes foram: diâmetro da plataforma, altura da plataforma, diâmetro da conexão plataforma-rosca, ângulo da conexão plataforma-rosca, diâmetro externo, diâmetro interno, passo de rosca, altura da rosca e comprimento. Para obtenção dos resultados foi realizada análise estatística ANOVA e Teste de Tukey com 5% de nível de significância. O ensaio de torção causou deformação visível no perfil externo dos implantes. Houve diferença estatística entre os implantes (p<0,05), antes e após a torção, nas variáveis: diâmetro da plataforma, altura da plataforma, diâmetro da conexão plataforma-rosca e comprimento. Foram observadas alterações na altura da plataforma dos implantes CC e CA, fratura dos implantes CA, fratura do montador de MP e MS, e espanamento das roscas internas de CC. Portanto, os implantes são homogêneos antes da torção, porém esta influenciou no perfil desses quando excessiva, causando deformação do parafuso.


Subject(s)
Humans , Dental Implants , Dental Prosthesis Design , Dental Materials/chemistry , Equipment Failure , Materials Testing , Porosity , Stress, Mechanical , Surface Properties , Torque , Torsion, Mechanical , Titanium/chemistry
6.
Rev. ABO nac ; 19(3): 150-155, jun.-jul. 2011. ilus, tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS, BBO | ID: lil-667623

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: Avaliar a influência do formato e tratamento de superfície de diferentes implantesdentários, na estabilidade primária, através de ensaio de arrancamento, quandoinseridos em poliuretana. Material e Métodos - Trinta e dois implantes de quatro diferentestipos - cilíndricos hexágono externo sem tratamento de superfície, cilíndricos hexágonoexterno com duplo tratamento de superfície, cilíndrico hexágono interno com tratamentode superfície, e cônico hexágono externo sem tratamento de superfície; foram inseridos emsegmentos de ossos artificiais. Foi realizado o ensaio de arrancamento utilizando a célulade carga de 200 kgf na velocidade de 2mm/min. Resultados - Os implantes cilíndricose de maior diâmetro apresentaram valores de resistência ao arrancamento superiores aoscônicos que possuíam menor diâmetro, sendo que os implantes com superfície tratadaapresentaram valores superiores ao dos implantes com superfície usinada. Conclusão -Concluiu-se que o formato, o tamanho, e a superfície do implante dentário influenciam naresistência ao arrancamento, o que sugere interferência na estabilidade primária.


Objective: To evaluate the influence of format and surface treatment of different dentalimplants, in the primary stability, through pullout test, when inserted into polyurethane.Methods - Thirty-two implants of four different types - cylindrical, external hexagon,without surface treatment; cylindrical, external hexagon, with double surface treatment;cylindrical, internal hexagon, with surface treatment; tapered, external hexagon,without surface treatment - had been inserted in segments of artificial bones. Thepull-out test was performed using the load cell of 200 kgf at a speed of 2mm/min.Results - The cylindrical implants and of bigger diameter had values of pullout resistancegreaters to that with conical and had lower diameter, and treated surface implants had presentedgreaters values to the one of the implants without treated surface. Conclusion - Weconclude that the format, size and surface of dental implant affect the pullout resistance,what suggests interference in the primary stability.


Subject(s)
Biocompatible Materials , Dental Implants , Osseointegration , Tensile Strength
7.
Article in Portuguese | LILACS, BBO | ID: lil-618559

ABSTRACT

O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a influência do formato e tratamento de superfície na estabilidade primária de implantes através do torque de inserção e força máxima de arrancamento. Foram selecionados quatro tipos de implantes Conexão® (Conexão, Jaú, SP, Brasil): implantes cilíndricos com hexágono externo e duplo tratamento de superfície Porous (Master Porous); implantes cilíndricos com hexágono externo e usinados padrão Brånemark (Master Screw); implantes cilíndricos com hexágono interno e tratamento de superfície Porous (Conect AR); e implantes cônicos com hexágono externo e usinados padrão Brånemark (Master Conect Conic). Para a instalação de implantes foram utilizados substratos de madeira de pinus. Para mensurar a estabilidade primária foi aferido o torque de inserção através do torquímetro digital Mackenaâ MK-2001; e força de arrancamento através da máquina Universal de Ensaios EMIC® DL-10000N. Após análise estatística realizada por meio dos testes ANOVA e Tukey, com α = 5%, foi observada diferença estatística entre os grupos estudados (p < 0,05). Implantes Master Porous mostraram maiores valores de torque de inserção com diferença estatística apenas quando comparados com implantes Conect AR (p = 0,03). Em relação a força máxima de arrancamento, implantes Conect AR tiveram os maiores resultados com diferença estatisticamente significante quando comparado com o grupo de implantes Conect Cônico (p = 0,00), no entanto sem diferença estatística com os grupos Master Porous e Master Screw (p > 0,05); além disso entre os grupos Conect Cônico e Master Porous houve diferença estatística (p = 0,02). Concluiu-se que o formato e tratamento de superfície de implantes não tiveram influência no torque de inserção e que implantes cilíndricos com tratamento de superfície demonstraram maior força de arrancamento.


The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the shape and surface treatment on the primary stability of implants by insertion torque and maximum pullout strength. Four types of implants Conexão® were selected: cylindrical implants with external hexagon and double surface treatment Porous (Master Porous); cylindrical implants with external hexagon and machined standard Brånemark (Master Screw); cylindrical implants with internal hexagon and surface treated Porous (Conect AR) and tapered implants with external hexagon machined standard Brånemark (Master Conect Conic). Wooden cylinders were used for implant placement. For the analysis of primary stability, insertion torque was measured through digital Mackenaâ MK-2001, and for pullout strength, an universal testing machine was used EMIC® DL-10000N. After statistical analysis ANOVA and Tukey test, there was statistical difference between groups (p < 0,05). Master Porous implants showed higher values with statistical difference only with implants Conect AR (p = 0,03) and without difference with the other groups. Implants Conect AR presented the highest values of maximum pullout strength and there was difference statistically significant when compared with the group of implants Conect Cônico (p = 0,00), however no difference between the groups and Master Porous and Master Screw (p > 0,05). Among the groups Master Porous and Conect Cônico was statistical difference (p = 0,02). It was concluded that the shape and surface treatment of implants had no influence on the insertion torque and cylindrical implants with surface treatment showed greater pullout strength.


Subject(s)
Dental Implants , Tensile Strength , Torque
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL