west china medical publishers
Author
  • Title
  • Author
  • Keyword
  • Abstract
Advance search
Advance search

Search

find Author "ZHANG Dongsheng" 2 results
  • Research on the mechanical differences of machinable lithium disilicate all-ceramic crowns

    Due to the superior pigment and high flexural strength, machinable lithium disilicate ceramics can be used as a monolithic crown or veneering porcelains on the zirconia core to form the all-ceramic crowns by sintering or bonding procedures. This paper reports the research on the differences in stress distributions amongst these three types of all-ceramic crowns under typical loading conditions. Three-dimensional numerical models of the restored crown based on the first mandibular molar were developed. The vertical concentrated load and 8-point uniformly distributed load were applied, respectively. The maximum stress and stress distribution were resulted from finite element evaluation. It was found that the maximum tensile stress in 3 types of restored crowns subjected to the concentrate load was less than the flexural strength of IPS e.max. The stress distributions in the sintered and bonded double layered crowns were basically identical, and different from the monolithic crown. The stress magnitude in veneer porcelain of the bonded crown was greater than that in the sintered crown. The use of IPS e.max computer aided design monolithic crown as molar restorations should be careful to avoid high stress as the cyclic stress is a concern of fatigue which may influence the longevity of the restored crown. The bonded double layer crowns bear greater risks of veneer chipping compared with the sintered crowns. The conclusions of this study provide helpful guidelines in clinical applications for preparation of computer aided design/computer aided manufacture lithium disilicate all-ceramic restorations.

    Release date:2017-04-01 08:56 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • EFFECTIVENESS AND BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF THREE FIXATION METHODS IN TREATMENT OF POSTERIOR Pilon FRACTURES

    Objective To investigate the effectiveness and biomechanical analysis of 3 fixation methods of screw anterior-posterior fixation (SAPF), screw posterior-anterior fixation (SPAF), and buttress plate fixation (BPF) in treatment of posterior Pilon fractures. Methods Fifteen fresh-frozen skeleto-ligamentous lower leg specimens were harvested to establish the models of posterior Pilon fracture, and then fracture was fixed with BPF (n=5), SAPF (n=5), and SPAF (n=5). Vertical force was loaded to internal fixation failure in a speed of 1 cm/minute with servohydraulic testing machine. The instantaneous loads of 1 mm and 2 mm steps and the failure modes were recorded. Between May 2008 and December 2011, 56 patients with posterior Pilon fracture were treated with SAPF (SAPF group) in 11 cases, or SPAF (SPAF group) in 26 cases, or BPF (BPF group) in 19 cases. There was no significant difference in age, gender, injury cause, side, disease duration, and complications among groups (P gt; 0.05). Clinical and radiographic examinations were used to assess the reduction and healing of fracture; the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score and the visual analogue scale (VAS) were used to evaluate the functional outcomes. Results No breaking or bending was observed in all specimens, fixation failure was caused by cancellous bone compression. The instantaneous loads of 1 mm and 2 mm steps were the largest in BPF group, larger in SPAF group, and smallest in SAPF group, showing significant differences among 3 groups (P lt; 0.05). A total of 47 cases were followed up 16-54 months (9 in SAPF group, 22 in SPAF group, and 16 in BPF group), with a mean time of 35.2 months. Fixation failure was found in 2 cases of SAPF group; the other cases obtain bony union within 3 to 4 months (mean, 3.2 months) with no fixation failure. The AOFAS score was significantly lower in SAPF group than in SPAF and BPF groups (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was found between SPAF and BPF groups (P gt; 0.05). The VAS score was significantly higher in SAPF group than in SPAF and BPF groups (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was found between SPAF and BPF groups (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion SAPF could not reach enough fixation strength for the posterior Pilon fracture; both SPAF and BPF could reach rigid fixation, and have good effectiveness. And from the biomechanical points, BPF could reach better fixation strength than screw fixations.

    Release date:2016-08-31 04:05 Export PDF Favorites Scan
1 pages Previous 1 Next

Format

Content