Retention behaviors of different attachment systems: Precious versus nonprecious, precision versus semi-precision
Source abstract
Abstract
The aims of this study were to investigate the retention force changes of different attachment systems after 10,000 insertion-separation cycles and the difference in retention force between precious and non-precious materials of the same attachment system. Four types of attachments (Ball, Rod, M3 stud, and AP-Piccolino), produced using both precious and non-precious metal alloys, were tested (n=6). Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey's multiple comparison test, and t-test at a significance level of p≤0.05. Retention forces of all attachment types were significantly decreased after 10,000 insertion-separation cycles (p≤0.05). Rod and M3 attachment systems showed an initial increase in retention force, then an eventual decrease. At the end of the test, precious types of M3 and AP-Piccolino attachments had significantly higher retention force values than their non-precious ones (p≤0.05). Friction between non-precious attachment parts resulted in a higher retention loss than precious metal alloys.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental materials and restorations · Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (20)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) Wang HY, Zhang YM, Yao D, Chen JH. Effects of rigid and nonrigid extracoronal attachments on supporting tissues in extension base partial removable dental prostheses: A nonlinear finite element study. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105: 338-346.10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60066-8 ↗
2. 2) Chikunov I, Doan P, Vahidi F. Implant-retained partial overdenture with resilient attachments. J Prosthodont 2008; 17: 141-148.10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00261.x ↗
3. 3) Schmitt J, Wichmann M, Eitner S, Hamel J, Holst S. Five-year clinical follow-up of prefabricated precision attachments: A comparison of uni- and bilateral removable dental prostheses. Quintessence Int 2011; 42: 413-418.
4. 4) Wichmann MG, Kuntze W. Wear behavior of precision attachments. Int J Prosthodont 1999; 12: 409-414.
5. 5) Becerra G, MacEntee M. A classification of precision attachments. J Prosthet Dent 1987; 589: 322-327.10.1016/0022-3913(87)90049-7 ↗
6. 6) Burns DR, Ward JE. A review of attachments for removable partial denture design: Part 1. Classification and selection. Int J Prosthodont 1990; 3: 98-102.
7. 7) Steward BL, Edwards RO. Retention and wear of precisiontype attachments. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 49: 28-34.10.1016/0022-3913(83)90233-0 ↗
8. 8) Bayer S, Grüner M, Keilig L, Hültenschmidt R, Nicolay C, Bourauel C, Utz KH, Stark H. Investigation of the wear of prefabricated attachments —an in vitro study of retention forces and fitting tolerances. Quintessence Int 2007; 37: 229-237.
9. 9) Svetlize CA, Bodereau EF Jr. Comparative study of retentive anchor systems for overdentures. Quintessence Int 2004; 35: 443-448.
10. 10) Besimo CE, Guarneri A. In vitro retention force changes of prefabricated attachments for overdentures. J Oral Rehabil 2003; 30: 671-678.10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01140.x ↗
11. 11) Hedzelek W, Rzatowski S, Czarnecka B. Evaluation of the retentive characteristics of semi-precision extracoronal attachments. J Oral Rehabil 2011; 38: 462-468.10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02153.x ↗
12. 12) Wolf K, Ludwig K, Hartfil H, Kern M. Analysis of retention and wear of ball attachments. Quintessence Int 2009; 40: 405-412.
13. 13) Williams BH, Ochiai KT, Hojo S. Retention of maxillary implant overdenture bars of different designs. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 86: 603-607.10.1067/mpr.2001.120838 ↗
14. 14) Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Schmitt S. The effect of simulated function on the retention of bar-clip retained removable prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75: 570-573.10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90465-5 ↗
15. 15) Matthews KE, Chambless LA, Staffanou RS. Retention loss of implant attachments: a case report. J Prosthodont 1992; 1: 118-120.10.1111/j.1532-849X.1992.tb00442.x ↗
16. 16) Rutkunas V, Mizutani H, Takahashi H. Influence of attachment wear on retention of mandibular overdenture. J Oral Rehabil 2007; 34: 41-51.10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01640.x ↗
17. 17) Setz J, Hyung LS, Engel E. Retention of prefabricated attachments for implant stabilized overdentures in the edentulous mandible: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 80: 323-329.10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70133-7 ↗
18. 18) Kiat-Amnuay S, Khan Z, Gettleman L. Overdenture retention of four resilient liners over an implant bar. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 81: 568-573.10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70211-8 ↗
19. 19) Holst S, Blatz MB, Eitner S, Wichmann M. In vitro wear of different material combinations of intracoronal precision attachments. Int J Prosthodont 2006; 19: 330-332.
20. 20) Saito M, Miura Y, Notani K, Kawasaki T. Stress distribution of abutments and base displacement with precision attachment- and telescopic crown-retained removable partial dentures. J Oral Rehabil 2003; 30: 482-487.10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01092.x ↗