Comparison of the retentive characteristics of two additional attachment used with an implant bar attachment
10.4047/jkap.2021.59.2.173
- Author:
Jae-Won CHOI
1
;
Sung-Ki CHAE
;
Jung-Bo HUH
Author Information
1. Research and Development Institute, PNUADD Co., Ltd., Busan, Republic of Korea
- Publication Type:ORIGINAL ARTICLE
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2021;59(2):173-180
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Purpose:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retentive characteristics of the additional attachments used with implant bar attachment under repeated insertion/removal cycles.
Materials and methods:The newly developed attachment and the commercially available attachment were investigated: ADD-Lock (AL), Locator blue (LB). Two fixtures were placed parallel to each other on the custom lower mounting, and patrix of each attachment was fixed to the fixture. Also, the matrix of each attachment was placed on the opposing upper mounting. A universal testing machine was used to measure the retentive force during initial, 100, 250, 500, 1000, 2000, and 2500 repeated insertion/removal cycles. Wear and deformation of the attachment s were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM).Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05) and wilcoxon signed-rank test (α=.05) were performed to compare retentive force between each group and before and after 2500 repeated insertion/removal cycles.
Results:In terms of initial retentive force and retentive force after 2500 repeated insertion/removal cycles, the AL group (15.24 ± 1.46 N and 9.74 ± 1.16 N) showed significantly smaller values than the LB group (43.53 ± 12.39 N and 22.99 ± 4.77 N) (P <.05). Also, in the loss of retentive force, the AL group (5.50 ± 1.08 N, 36.08%) showed a smaller value than the LB group (20.54 ± 11.89 N, 47.19%) (P <.05). Based on SEM analysis, The AL group showed noticeable wear and deformation in the patrix and the LB group in the matrix.
Conclusion:Locator showed a higher initial retentive force than newly developed attachment, while the loss of retentive force was also higher. Both additional attachments are considered to have sufficient retentive force after repeated insertion/removal cycles.
