Mechanical Behavior and Failure Analysis of Prosthetic Retaining Screws after Long‐term Use In Vivo. Part 1: Characterization of Adhesive Wear and Structure of Retaining Screws
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: The general aim of this study and those presented in Parts 2-4 of this series was to characterize the structure, properties, wear, and fracture of prosthetic retaining screws in fixed detachable hybrid prostheses after long-term use in vivo. This part of the overall investigation addresses whether there are differences in thread wear between the screws closest to the fulcrum and those that are farthest from the fulcrum in fixed detachable hybrid prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The total number of prosthetic retaining screws used in this study was 100 (10 new and 90 used). New screws (controls) from Nobel Biocare (NB) were divided into Group 1 (slotted) and Group 2 (hexed). Ninety used screws (in service 18-120 months) were retrieved from fixed detachable hybrid prostheses in 18 patients (5 screws from each patient, 60 from NB and 30 from Sterngold). The used screws were divided into 18 groups. Additionally, each group was subdivided into A and B categories. Category A contained the middle three prosthetic screws, which were considered the farthest screws from the fulcrum line. Category B contained the most posterior two screws, which were considered the screws closest to the fulcrum line. All 100 screws were subjected to thorough, nondestructive testing. RESULTS: Light and scanning electron microscopic examination of all used screws for each group revealed surface deterioration of the active profile of the screw threads consistent with adhesive wear. The observed thread profile deterioration ranged from mild to severe. The wear was aggressive enough to cause galling, which led to thinning of the threads and, in severe cases, to knife-edges at thread crests. In ten groups, the most anterior three screws exhibited more wear than the most posterior two screws. In addition to thread wear, severe plastic deformation was detected on the bottom part of each screw for three groups, and a long external longitudinal crack was detected in one screw of Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study and those presented in Parts 2-4 demonstrate that different retaining screws from the same manufacturer and/or from different manufacturers have different geometrical design, microstructures, major alloy constituents, and microhardness, and that these differences influence their preload and fractured load values. In this part of the overall investigation, the occurrence of galling as a result of wear involving prosthetic retaining screws appears to be an inevitable and unavoidable consequence of long-term use in vivo in fixed detachable hybrid prostheses regardless of the intended/original preload value. The galling rate is greater on the middle three screws compared to the most posterior two screws in fixed detachable hybrid prostheses. The wear pattern is consistent with an adhesive wear mechanism; however, this study does not provide enough data to support a definitive analysis.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».