Effects of Autoclave Sterilization and Multiple Use on Implant Scanbody Deformation In Vitro.
accuracy
deformation
dental implant abutment
dental implants
scanner
sterilization
Journal
Materials (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1996-1944
Titre abrégé: Materials (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101555929
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Nov 2022
02 Nov 2022
Historique:
received:
12
10
2022
revised:
26
10
2022
accepted:
27
10
2022
entrez:
11
11
2022
pubmed:
12
11
2022
medline:
12
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In the intraoral scanner (IOS) impression technique for dental implants, a scanbody (SB) is connected to the implant and scanned. Poly(ether-ether-ketone) (PEEK) is a widely used material for SBs and it is recommended for single use. However, from the perspective of the Sustainable Development Goals, it is desirable to use these products multiple times. As SBs are used in patients' mouths, proper sterilization is necessary for multiple uses. In the present study, the effect of autoclave treatment and connection/disconnection on SB deformation was investigated. The SB was connected to the implant and stereolithography (STL) data were obtained. Then, the SB was disconnected and underwent autoclave treatment, or was connected and disconnected multiple times, or underwent a combination of both processes. The results showed that there were significant differences in the distance and angle when comparing SBs before and after the autoclave treatment, but repeated connections with or without autoclave treatment had no significant impact on the measured values. The surface texture, observed with scanning electron microscopy, showed that a groove was observed on the surface of the SB, but the groove did not show major changes after 10 connection/autoclave processes. These results indicate that autoclave sterilization has some impact on SB deformation but connection/disconnection itself may not have a huge impact on SB deformation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36363311
pii: ma15217717
doi: 10.3390/ma15217717
pmc: PMC9655283
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Nov 16;:
pubmed: 34799084
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 Feb 23;32(2):313–321
pubmed: 28231346
J Prosthodont. 2018 Jan;27(1):35-41
pubmed: 27483210
Bioengineering (Basel). 2018 Feb 21;5(1):
pubmed: 29466289
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 May 20;34(4):891–898
pubmed: 31107939
J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Sep;114(3):403-6.e1
pubmed: 26047800
J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2016 Jul;27(7):118
pubmed: 27259708
J Oral Implantol. 2009;35(4):185-8
pubmed: 19813423
BMC Oral Health. 2017 Jun 2;17(1):92
pubmed: 28577366
J Prosthodont Res. 2020 Apr;64(2):128-136
pubmed: 31255546
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Dec;120(6):913-918
pubmed: 29961627
BMC Oral Health. 2019 Jun 6;19(1):101
pubmed: 31170969
J Prosthet Dent. 1999 Jan;81(1):7-13
pubmed: 9878969
Quintessence Int. 2014 Jan;45(1):39-51
pubmed: 24392494
BMC Oral Health. 2020 Aug 2;20(1):217
pubmed: 32741366
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Mar;21(2):579-587
pubmed: 27469102
J Prosthodont Res. 2016 Jan;60(1):12-9
pubmed: 26520679
Implant Dent. 2001;10(2):85-92
pubmed: 11450418
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:374-392
pubmed: 30328182
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2020 Feb;102:103455
pubmed: 31610355
J Clin Pathol. 1961 Jan;14:59-61
pubmed: 13752416
Dent J (Basel). 2017 Dec 15;5(4):
pubmed: 29563441
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013 Mar;48(3):452-8
pubmed: 23208313
J Oral Rehabil. 2015 Jun;42(6):467-80
pubmed: 25580846
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Oct;23 Suppl 6:22-38
pubmed: 23062125
J Bacteriol. 1937 Nov;34(5):535-48
pubmed: 16560075
Stomatologija. 2018;20(2):54-58
pubmed: 30531169