Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Publication year range
1.
Med. oral patol. oral cir. bucal (Internet) ; 21(5): e631-e636, sept. 2016. ilus, tab
Artículo en Inglés | IBECS (España) | ID: ibc-155777

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To characterize the surface topography of several dental implants for commercial use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Dental implants analyzed were Certain (Biomet 3i), Tissue Level (Straumann), Interna (BTI), MG-InHex (MozoGrau), SPI (Alphabio) and Hikelt (Bioner). Surface topography was ascertained using a confocal microscope with white light. Roughness parameters obtained were: Ra, Rq, Rv, Rp, Rt, Rsk and Rku. The results were analysed using single-factor ANOVA and Student-Neuman-Keuls (p< 0.05) tests. RESULTS: Certain and Hikelt obtained the highest Ra and Rq scores, followed by Tissue Level. Interna and SPI obtained lower scores, and MG-InHex obtained the lowest score. Rv scores followed the same trend. Certain obtained the highest Rp score, followed by SPI and Hikelt, then Interna and Tissue Level. MG-InHex obtained the lowest scores. Certain obtained the highest Rt score, followed by Interna and Hikelt, then SPI and Tissue Level. The lowest scores were for MG-InHex. Rsk was negative (punctured surface) in the MG-InHex, SPI and Tissue Level systems, and positive (pointed surface) in the other systems. Rku was higher than 3 (Leptokurtic) in Tissue Level, Interna, MG-InHex and SPI, and lower than 3 (Platykurtic) in Certain and Hikelt. CONCLUSIONS: The type of implant determines surface topography, and there are differences in the roughness parameters of the various makes of implants for clinical use


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Implantación Dental/métodos , Implantes Dentales/clasificación , Boca/anatomía & histología , Anomalías Maxilofaciales/diagnóstico , Microscopía Confocal
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda