O estudo selecionou quarenta e dois implantes que possuiam proteses totais implantosuportadas (com e sem cantilever) instaladas a pelo menos cinco anos. As radiografias foram mensuradas atraves do software Digimizer (MedCalc Software, Belgica). A mensuracao da perda ossea foi realizada na distal dos implantes, a partir da superficie da plataforma do implante ate a crista ossea marginal; e a extensao do cantilever foi mensurada a partir da superficie do implante distal ate a extremidade da estrutura da protese. Tres grupos foram formados de acordo com comprimento do cantilever: G1 = ≤ 15 mm, G2 = > 15 mm; G3 = sem cantilever. O tipo de antagonista foi agrupado em: RP = protese removivel; FP = protese fixa implanto-suportada; ND = denticao natural. A analise dos dados foi realizada de acordo com a extensao do cantilever e o tipo de arco antagonista. Utilizou-se o teste estatistico de Person's para verificacao da normalidade e Test t de Student com valor de P (P ≦ 0.05). Ao comparar G1 e G2, nao houve diferenca estatisticamente significativa, no entanto, uma perda ossea aumentada foi observada em ambos os grupos com cantilever (G1 e G2) quando comparados ao G3. Extensoes de cantilever irao causar um aumento na perda ossea marginal, porem o tipo de antagonista nao ira influenciar esta perda ossea.

This study selected forty-two implants with full arch implantsupported fixed prostheses (with and without a cantilever) with at least five years' loading. Radiographic measurements were performed using Digimizer software (MedCalc Software, Belgium). Bone loss was measured on the distal side of the implant, from the surface of the platform to the edge of the bone crest, and the extent of the cantilever was measured from the distal surface of the last abutment to the end of the metal structure. Three groups were formed according the length of the cantilever: G1: cantilever ≤ 15 mm; G2: cantilever >15 mm; G3: no cantilever. Types of antagonists were grouped as: RP = removable complete denture; FP = fixed implant-supported prosthesis; ND = natural dentition. Data were analyzed according to the length of the cantilever and type of antagonist using Person's test to analyze normality and Student's t-test with P ≦ 0.05. No statistically significant difference was found between G1 and G2; however, increased bone loss was observed in both cantilever groups (G1 and G2) compared to G3 (P> 0.05). The antagonist showed no significant difference in bone loss ( P ≦ 0.05). Cantilevers showed increases in marginal bone loss. The type of antagonist did not influence bone loss.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test a new portable vibrator for plaster pouring (developed for this purpose), comparing the effect of its use on the accuracy of working cast of implant-supported restorations to the conventional vibrator. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From a master cast with 2 implants, 30 transfer moldings were made randomly and divided into three groups: Group I (GI): pouring performed in an outsourced dental laboratory with conventional plaster vibrator (10 casts), Group II (GII): pouring performed in the laboratory of the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC) with conventional plaster vibrator (10 casts) and Group III (GIII): pouring performed with the portable vibrator fabricated for this study (10 casts). The position of the analogue and marginal adaptation of the infrastructure were verified by testing the single screw on the master model and on the working model. The measurement of misfit was blindly performed with a precision microscope and analyzing unit, Quadra-Check 200. The data were statistically analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Holm-Sidak test (α=0.05). RESULTS: Means±standard deviations were as follows: GI: 19.19±4.73 µm; GII: 21.72±5.41 µm; GIII: 13.5±2.39 µm (P<0.05), with GIII significantly lower as compared to the other groups. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that a greater accuracy of working cast was achieved when a portable vibrator was used for casting molds.