Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2017 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Ávila, Roberta Alencastro
 |
Orientador(a): |
Teixeira, Eduardo Rolim
 |
Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
Idioma: |
por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
|
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Odontologia
|
Departamento: |
Faculdade de Odontologia
|
País: |
Brasil
|
Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
Link de acesso: |
http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/7493
|
Resumo: |
Introduction: The objective of this work was through a prospective cohort analysis evaluate possible correlations between periimplantar bone loss of lower fixed implants (PTFIs) and their respective distribution of bilateral occlusal contacts, maximum bite force (FMM), area occlusal contacts of left and right lateral movements, their relation with the antagonist arch and the presence or absence of provisional fixed prosthesis. Materials and Methods: This convenience sample consisted of 20 (twenty) patients with lower PTFIs who were followed for one year, after the installation of the prosthesis. In the two data collections the FMM measurement was performed, the occlusal contacts distribution was measured through the T-Scan III device and a Cone Beam computed tomography was ordered to evaluate the periimplant bone loss. For the measurement of bone loss, a comparison was made between the initial and second moments. After this process the results of periimplant bone loss were correlated and compared with the other data obtained. The statistical analysis performed to evaluate bone loss of implants was the Friedman test and Wilcoxon test, Mann-Whitney comparisons test, the Spearman correlations test and Student's T-test. Results: The main results were: 1) the implants do not differentiate in relation to periimplant bone loss; 2) there was no significant correlation of bone loss with FMM, right and left laterality and the distribution of contacts in maximum intercuspal position; 3) in comparison between bone loss of patients with full dentures and partially edentulous, they showed no statistically significant difference, as well as in patients who received provisional full prosthesis and those who did not receive. Conclusion: Bone loss appears to occur similarly between all implants, sides, and regions. FMM, R and L laterality, MIH contact distribution, and the antagonist arcade do not appear to interfere with periimplant bone remodeling. The preliminary results of this study suggest that there is no need for provisioning in inferior restorations, since there were no differences in bone loss between patients who received and did not receive fixed provisional. |