Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33125441›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Stress distribution on different bar materials in implant-retained palatal obturator.

Regina Furbino Villefort, João Paulo Mendes Tribst, Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva, Alexandre Luiz Borges, Nívia Castro Binda, Carlos Eduardo de Almeida Ferreira, Marco Antonio Bottino, Sandra Lúcia Ventorim von Zeidler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Regina Furbino VillefortBiotechnology Program, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Rede Nordeste de Biotecnologia (RENORBIO), Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9196-5400
João Paulo Mendes TribstPost-Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry (Prosthodontic), Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp/SJC), São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-5412-3546
Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal PivaPost-Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry (Prosthodontic), Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp/SJC), São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3844-2053
Alexandre Luiz BorgesPost-Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry (Prosthodontic), Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp/SJC), São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
Nívia Castro BindaBiotechnology Program, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Rede Nordeste de Biotecnologia (RENORBIO), Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0409-4265
Carlos Eduardo de Almeida FerreiraPrivate Practitioner, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Marco Antonio BottinoPost-Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry (Prosthodontic), Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (Unesp/SJC), São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
Sandra Lúcia Ventorim von ZeidlerBiotechnology Program, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Rede Nordeste de Biotecnologia (RENORBIO), Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversidade Federal do Espírito Santo · BRFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Espírito Santo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implant-retained custom-milled framework enhances the stability of palatal obturator prostheses. Therefore, to evaluate the mechanical response of implant-retained obturator prostheses with bar-clip attachment and milled bars, in three different materials under two load incidences were simulated. A maxilla model which Type IIb maxillary defect received five external hexagon implants (4.1 x 10 mm). An implant-supported palatal obturator prosthesis was simulated in three different materials: polyetheretherketone (PEEK), titanium (Ti:90%, Al:6%, V:4%) and Co-Cr (Co:60.6%, Cr:31.5%, Mo:6%) alloys. The model was imported into the analysis software and divided into a mesh composed of nodes and tetrahedral elements. Each material was assumed isotropic, elastic and homogeneous and all contacts were considered ideal. The bone was fixed and the load was applied in two different regions for each material: at the palatal face (cingulum area) of the central incisors (100 N magnitude at 45°); and at the occlusal surface of the first left molar (150 N magnitude normal to the surface). The microstrain and von-Mises stress were selected as criteria for analysis. The posterior load showed a higher strain concentration in the posterior peri-implant tissue, near the load application side for cortical and cancellous bone, regardless the simulated material. The anterior load showed a lower strain concentration with reduced magnitude and more implants involving in the load dissipation. The stress peak was calculated during posterior loading, which 77.7 MPa in the prosthetic screws and 2,686 με microstrain in the cortical bone. For bone tissue and bar, the material stiffness was inversely proportional to the calculated microstrain and stress. However, for the prosthetic screws and implants the PEEK showed higher stress concentration than the other materials. PEEK showed a promising behavior for the bone tissue and for the integrity of the bar and bar-clip attachments. However, the stress concentration in the prosthetic screws may represent an increase in failure risk. The use of Co-Cr alloy can reduce the stress in the prosthetic screw; however, it increases the bone strain; while the Titanium showed an intermediate behavior.

Indexed as

Palatal ObturatorsBenzophenonesBiomechanical PhenomenaChromium AlloysDental MaterialsHumansKetonesMaterials TestingMaxillaModels, AnatomicPolyethylene GlycolsPolymersStress, MechanicalTitaniumBenzophenonesChromium AlloysDental MaterialsKetonespolyetheretherketonePolyethylene GlycolsPolymersTitanium

Identifiers

PMID33125441
PMCPMC7598468
OpenAlexW3096092120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.