Mechanical properties of magnetic attachments for removable prostheses on teeth and implants.
Mechanical properties of magnetic attachments for removable prostheses on teeth and implants.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1532-849x.2008.00356.x
复制
发表时间：
2008-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Setz, Juergen M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Boeckler, Arne F;Morton, Dean;Setz, Juergen M
目的：牙齿和种植体上的磁性附件可用于提高可摘假体的稳定性、支撑和固位。磁性附件有多种形式，根据设计、附件的机械性能和临床适应症进行划分。最近开发的附件系统很小，并且有望提高保持能力，而现有的磁性附件则继续在技术上进行修改和改进。这项研究回顾并比较了用作根锚和种植体的磁性附件的最大保持力和特征曲线。 材料和方法：对 24 个钐钴 (SmCo) 和钕铁硼 (NeFeB) 磁性附件（12 个牙齿和 12 个种植体）进行了评估。样品由制造商提供或根据其说明制造。使用非磁性测试装置（s = 40 mm，v = 20 mm/min）在校准万能试验机中对每种产品和每种组合的五个磁体对进行了 10 次测试。结果以电子方式记录并与制造商的详细信息进行比较。结果：根管保持器的最大保持力范围为 1.4 至 6.6 N。种植体上磁性附件的最大保持力范围为 0.7 至 5.8 N。距离 0.1 毫米后，不同系统的完全反向分布变得明显。制造商提供的固位力是在一个种植体基台上实现的，根保持器的固位力（与制造商提供的固位力相比）在 42.5% 到 92.9% 之间，种植体基台的固位力在 43.0% 到 99.4% 之间。 结论：磁性附着体之间的初始固位能力和特性曲线都存在差异。最近推出的产品尽管尺寸较小，但提供了相对较高的初始保持力。在大多数评估的磁性系统中，测量的保持力和制造商的信息有所不同。
PURPOSE: Magnetic attachments on teeth and implants may be used to improve stability, support, and retention of removable prostheses. Various forms of magnetic attachments are available, divided according to the design, the mechanical properties of the attachments, and the clinical indication. Recently developed attachment systems are small and promise improved retentive capacity, while existing magnetic attachments continue to be technologically modified and improved. This investigation reviewed and compared maximum retentive forces and characteristic curves for magnetic attachments indicated for use as root anchors and on implants.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four samarium-cobalt (SmCo) and neodym-iron-boron (NeFeB) magnetic attachments (12 tooth- and 12 implant-borne) were evaluated. Specimens were delivered by the manufacturers or fabricated according to their instructions. Five magnet pairs of each product and each combination were tested 10 times in a calibrated universal testing machine using a nonmagnetic test device (s = 40 mm, v = 20 mm/min). Results were recorded electronically and compared to manufacturers' details.RESULTS: Maximum retentive forces for root keepers ranged from 1.4 to 6.6 N. Maximum retentive forces for magnetic attachments on implants ranged from 0.7 to 5.8 N. After a distance of 0.1 mm, a complete reversed distribution of the different systems became obvious. The retentive force provided by the manufacturer was achieved in one implant abutment, with retentive force (as compared to those provided by the manufacturers) for root keepers ranging between 42.5% and 92.9% and for implant abutments between 43.0% and 99.4%.CONCLUSION: There were differences between magnetic attachments for both the initial retentive capabilities and the characteristic curves. Recently introduced products provided relatively high initial retentive forces despite their small size. The measured retentive forces and the manufacturer's information differed in the majority of magnetic systems evaluated.