References : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [2]
Assenza B, Tripodi D, Scarano A, Perrotti V, Piattelli A, Iezzi G, et al. Bacterial leakage in implants with different implant-abutment connections: an in vitro study. J Periodontol. 2011;83:491–7.
Ha CY, Lim YJ, Kim MJ, Choi JH. The influence of abutment angulation on screw loosening of implants in the anterior maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26:45–55.
Spazzin AO, Henrique GE, Nobilo MA, Consani RL, Correr-Sobrinho L, Mesquita MF. Effect of retorque on loosening torque of prosthetic screws under two levels of fit of implant-supported dentures. Braz Dent J. 2010;21:12–7.
Khraisat A. bu-Hammad O, Dar-Odeh N, Al-Kayed AM. Abutment screw loosening and bending resistance of external hexagon implant system after lateral cyclic loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2004;6:157–64.
Farina AP, Spazzin AO, Pantoja JM, Consani RL, Mesquita MF. An in vitro comparison of joint stability of implant-supported fixed prosthetic suprastructures retained with different prosthetic screws and levels of fit under masticatory simulation conditions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27:833–8.
Diez JS, Brigagao VC, Cunha LG, Neves AC, da Silva-Concilio LR. Influence of diamondlike carbon-coated screws on the implant-abutment interface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27:1055–60.
Kim SK, Koak JY, Heo SJ, Taylor TD, Ryoo S, Lee SY. Screw loosening with interchangeable abutments in internally connected implants after cyclic loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27:42–7.
Tsuge T, Hagiwara Y. Influence of lateral-oblique cyclic loading on abutment screw loosening of internal and external hexagon implants. Dent Mater J. 2009;28:373–81.
Tzenakis GK, Nagy WW, Fournelle RA, Dhuru VB. The effect of repeated torque and salivary contamination on the preload of slotted gold implant prosthetic screws. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;88:183–91.
Bidra AS, Rungruanganunt P. Clinical outcomes of implant abutments in the anterior region: a systematic review. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2013;25:159–76.
Wong K, Boyde A, Howell PG. A model of temperature transients in dental implants. Biomaterials. 2001;22:2795–7.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- Background : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [1]
- Background : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [2]
- Methods : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- Results : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [1]
- Results : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [2]
- Discussion : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [1]
- Discussion : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [2]
- Discussion : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [3]
- Conclusions : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- References : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [1]
- References : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [2]
- References : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [3]
- References : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types [4]
- Acknowledgements : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- Author information : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- Additional information : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- Rights and permissions : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- About this article : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant body: an in vitro study comparing two ultrasonic devices and five implant types
- Figure 1. Implant embedded in epoxy resin with thermocouple at the outer surface. : Temperature rise during removal of fractured components out of the implant
- Figure 2. Results for all implants instrumented with two tested ultrasonic devices, either with or without cooling. (a) Temperature rise when instrumenting with the Satelec ultrasonic device without cooling. The horizontal dotted line denotes the assumed critical rise in temperature. Temperature rise at 30 s: bone level 3.3 mm > bone level 4.1 mm > Straumann regular neck 3.3 mm = Astra 3.5 mm = Straumann regular neck 4.8 mm. (b) Temperature rise when instrumenting with the Satelec ultrasonic device with cooling. The horizontal dotted line denotes the assumed critical rise in temperature. Temperature rise at 30 s: bone level 3.3 mm = Astra 3.5 implant > Straumann regular neck 3.3 mm = Straumann regular neck 4.8 mm. Temperature rise at the bone level 4.1 implant lies in between the bone level 3.3 mm and Astra 3.5 mm implant and both Straumann implants, but not significantly different from either of these implants. (c) EMS without cooling. Temperature rise at 30 s: bone level 3.3 mm = bon