1.Stability of the prosthetic screws of three types of craniofacial prostheses retention systems.
Antonio Gabriel LANATA-FLORES ; Eder Alberto SIGUA-RODRIGUEZ ; Douglas Rangel GOULART ; Veber Luiz BOMFIM-AZEVEDO ; Sergio OLATE ; José Ricardo DE ALBERGARIA-BARBOSA
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2016;42(6):352-357
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the stability of prosthetic screws from three types of craniofacial prostheses retention systems (bar-clip, ball/O-ring, and magnet) when submitted to mechanical cycling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve models of acrylic resin were used with implants placed 20 mm from each other and separated into three groups: (1) bar-clip (Sistema INP, São Paulo, Brazil), (2) ball/O-ring (Sistema INP), and (3) magnet (Metalmag, São Paulo, Brazil), with four samples in each group. Each sample underwent a mechanical cycling removal and insertion test (f=0.5 Hz) to determine the torque and the detorque values of the retention screws. A servo-hydraulic MTS machine (810-Flextest 40; MTS Systems, Eden Prairie, MN, USA) was used to perform the cycling with 2.5 mm and a displacement of 10 mm/s. The screws of the retention systems received an initial torque of 30 Ncm and the torque values required for loosening the screw values were obtained in three cycles (1,080, 2,160, and 3,240). The screws were retorqued to 30 Ncm before each new cycle. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 24 screws grouped as follows: bar-clip (n=8), ball/O-ring (n=8), and magnet (n=8). There were significant differences between the groups, with greater detorque values observed in the ball/O-ring group when compared to the bar-clip and magnet groups for the first cycle. However, the detorque value was greater in the bar-clip group for the second cycle. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that all prosthetic screws will loosen slightly after an initial tightening torque, also the bar-clip retention system demonstrated greater loosening of the screws when compared with ball/O-ring and magnet retention systems.
Grassland
;
Maxillofacial Prosthesis
;
Prostheses and Implants*
;
Prosthesis Failure
;
Prosthesis Retention
;
Torque
2.Mechanical evaluation of the use of conventional and locking miniplate/screw systems used in sagittal split ramus osteotomy.
Zarina Tatia Barbosa VIEIRA SANTOS ; Douglas Rangel GOULART ; Eder Alberto SIGUA-RODRIGUEZ ; Leandro POZZER ; Sergio OLATE ; José Ricardo ALBERGARIA-BARBOSA
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2017;43(2):77-82
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the mechanical resistance of four different osteosyntheses modeled in two different sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) designs and to determine the linear loading in a universal testing machine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An in vitro experiment was conducted with 40 polyurethane hemimandibles. The samples were divided into two groups based on osteotomy design; Group I, right angles between osteotomies and Group II, no right angles between osteotomies. In each group, the hemimandibles were distributed into four subgroups according to the osteosynthesis method, using one 4-hole 2.0 mm conventional or locking plate, with or without one bicortical screw with a length of 12.0 mm (hybrid technique). Each subgroup contained five samples and was subjected to a linear loading test in a universal testing machine. RESULTS: The peak load and peak displacement were compared for statistical significance using PASW Statistics 18.0 (IBM Co., USA). In general, there was no difference between the peak load and peak displacement related to osteotomy design. However, when the subgroups were compared, the osteotomy without right angles offered higher mechanical resistance when one conventional or locking 2.0 mm plate was used. One locking plate with one bicortical screw showed higher mechanical resistance (162.72±42.55 N), and these results were statistically significantly compared to one conventional plate with monocortical screws (P=0.016) and one locking plate with monocortical screws (P=0.012). The difference in peak displacement was not statistically significant based on osteotomy design or internal fixation system configuration. CONCLUSION: The placement of one bicortical screw in the distal region promoted better stabilization of SSRO. The osteotomy design did not influence the mechanical behavior of SSRO when the hybrid technique was applied.
In Vitro Techniques
;
Jaw Fixation Techniques
;
Methods
;
Orthognathic Surgery
;
Osteotomy
;
Osteotomy, Sagittal Split Ramus*
;
Polyurethanes