S-Space College of Dentistry/School of Dentistry (치과대학/치의학대학원) Dept. of Dentistry (치의학과) Journal Papers (저널논문_치의학과)
A strain gauge analysis of implant-supported cantilevered fixed prosthesis under distal static load
- Sohn, Byoung-Sup; Heo, Seong-Joo; Chang, Ik-Tae; Koak, Jai-Young; Kim, Seong-Kyun
- Issue Date
- 대한치과보철학회지 45:717-723,2007
- Strain gauge analysis; Implant-supported cantilevered fixed prosthesis; Digital push-pull gauge
- Statement of problem. Unreasonable distal cantilevered implant-supported prosthesis
can mask functional problems of reconstruction temporarily, but it can cause serious strain and
stress around its supported implant and surrounding alveolar bone.
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate strain of implants supporting distal cantilevered
fixed prosthesis with two different cantilevered length under distal cantilevered static
Material and methods. A partially edentulous mandibular test model was fabricated with
auto-polymerizing resin (POLYUROCK; Metalor technologies, Stuttgart, Swiss) and artificial
denture teeth (Endura; Shoh inc., Kyoto, Japan). Two implants-supported 5-unit screwretained
cantilevered fixed prosthesis was made using standard methods with Type Ill gold
alloy (Harmony C&B55; Ivoclar-vivadent, Liechtenstein, Germany) for superstructure and reinforced
hard resin (Tescera; Ivoclar-vivadent, Liechtenstein, Germany) for occlusal material.
Two strain gauges (KFG-1-120-C1-1lLlM2R; KYOWA electronic instruments, Tokyo,
Japan) were then attached to the mesial and the distal surface of each standard abutment with
adhesive (M-bond 200; Tokuyama, Tokyo, Japan). Total four strain gauges were attached to
test model and connected to dynamic signal conditioning strain amplifier (CTA1000; Curiotech
inc., Paju, Korea).
The stepped 20-100 N in 25 N increments, cantilevered static load 8rnm apart (Group I ) or
16mm apart (Group 11 ), were applied using digital push-pull gauge (Push-Pull Scale &
Digital Force Gauge, Axis inc., Seoul, Korea). Each step was performed ten times and every strain
signal was monitored and recorded.
Results. In case of Group I, the strain values were surveyed by 80.7 - 353.8 pm /m in Chl,
7.5 - 47.9 p /m in CQ45.7 - 278.6 rn / m in Ch3 and -212.2 - -718.7 rn / m in Ch4 depending
on increasing cantilevered static load. On the other hand, the strain values of Group II
were surveyed by 149.9 - 612.8 0 /m in Chl, 26.0 - 168.5 rn /m in Ch2,114.3 - 632.3 p /m in
Ch3, and -323.2 - -894.7 pm /m in Ch4.
Conclusion. A comparative statistical analysis using paired sample t-test about GroupⅠ Vs
GroupⅡ under distal cantilevered load shows that there are statistical significant differences
for all 4 channels (P<0.05).