Browsing by Author "Elsherbini, Ahmed N"
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Dislodging Force Resistance in Hemi-mandibulectomy Patients Rehabilitated with Acrylic Resin and 3D-printed Resin Prostheses(Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd, 2023-08) Elsherbini, Ahmed N; Alsharif, Tarek K; Elsherbini, Nancy NAim: The aim of this crossover study was to compare dislodging resistance in hemi-mandibulectomy patients who had been rehabilitated with prostheses made of conventional acrylic resin (CA), conventional acrylic resin lined with a soft liner (CAS), and three-dimensional (3D)—printed resin. Materials and methods: Patients were selected with hemi-mandibulectomy class III according to the Cantor and Curtis classification. Patients had a conventional acrylic denture for the upper arch with twin occlusion. For the lower arch, the patient received a conventional acrylic denture, after 3 months it was lined with a soft liner, and after 3 months, it was retrieved and they were given a 3D-printed denture for 3 more months. Resistance to dislodging force was measured using a force gauge at insertion and after 3 months. Results: The resistance to dislodging forces was highest in the printed denture, followed by lined acrylic followed by the conventional acrylic with mean values of (3.72 ± 0.057) Newton (N), (2.696 ± 0.151) N, and (1.91 ± 0.089) N, respectively. Conclusion: Three-dimensional (3D)—printed denture bases showed the highest resistance to dislodging forces, followed by the CAS, and finally the CA. Clinical significance: Aiding patients with hemi-mandibulectomy with the best material to be used in their rehabilitation with dental prostheses. © The Author(s).Item Mini-poll Coping as an Alternative Attachment in Toothsupported Overdenture Prosthesis: A Randomized Controlled Trial(Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd, 2023-12) Elsherbini, Ahmed NPurpose: Evaluation of the resistance to dislodging resistance in the conventional overdenture, mini-poll coping, and telescopic crown. Materials and methods: A sample size of 45 participants (15 in each group) was determined. Partially edentulous patients with only the two lower canines present were selected. After the fabrication of the three prostheses, using a force gauge, a dislodging pushing force was applied to the three groups at the labial frenal notches. Measurements were taken at insertion, after 1 and 3 months. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey was calculated for the groups. Results: The mean values for the conventional overdenture, mini-poll, and telescopic at insertion were 2.45 ± 0.095, 6.47 ± 0.101, and 6.66 ± 0.239 newton (N), respectively. The mean values for the conventional overdenture, mini-poll, and telescopic after 1 month were 3.58 ± 0.13, 8.5 ± 0.5, and 7.80 ± 0.435 N, respectively. The mean values for the conventional overdenture, mini-poll, and telescopic after 3 months were 3.7 ± 0.147, 8.56 ± 0.598, and 8.56 ± 0.452 N, respectively. Conclusion: The mini-poll coping and telescopic crown recorded the highest retentive values, however, the mini-poll had the advantage of much lower cost when compared with the telescopic crown.Item Repercussion of Conventional Complete Mandibular Denture Versus Single Implant Over-Denture on Retention and Biting Force(Scientific Foundation SPIROSKI, 9/17/2021) Elsherbini, Ahmed N; Niedermeie, WAIM: Aim of this study was the evaluate the retention and biting force of conventional complete denture and after placement of a single implant in the mandible for an implant-retained over-denture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight completely edentulous patients were selected. A single implant was inserted at the symphysis of the mandible and left to osseointegrate. During the osseointegration period, a conventional complete denture was fabricated and inserted. Retention and biting force were measured at insertion and after 3 months of service. After osseointegration attachment was connected, space was formed in the fitting surface of the existing mandibular denture and retention silicon was placed. Retention and biting force were measured at insertion and after 3 months of follow-up. Data were collected and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The retention mean values for the complete denture was 2.420 ± 0.360, however, the retention mean values for the single implant over-denture was 6.395 ± 0.289. F = 3.80 with statically significant difference between the groups of p < 0.01. The biting force mean value for the complete denture was 52.62 ± 2.71, however, the biting force mean value for single implant over-denture was 71.45 ± 2.73. F = 1.790 with statically insignificance difference between the groups of p > 0.01. CONCLUSION: Single implant overdenture improved the retention and the biting force when compared with the complete denture, this has improved the quality of life and happiness. © 2021, Scientific Foundation SPIROSKI. All rights reserved.Item Stress analysis of over-denture abutments treated with two obturation techniques(University Library System, University of Pittsburgh, 8/18/2021) Elsherbini, Ahmed N; Nagy, Mohamed M; Elsherbini, Nancy NAim: Evaluation of stresses induced on over-denture abutments endodonticaly treated with two different obturation techniques. Materials and Methods: 4 pesudo-realistic models were fabricated with two remaining canines as abutments. One canine was treated with lateral obturation technique and the other with vertical obturation. An over-denture was fabricated on the model. Then strain gauges were attached on the coronal one third of the root buccally and lingually. 50 N were applied on the middle of the model using universal testing machine and readings were collected. Results: From the collected data the lateral obturation showed 85.25±104.901 μ∈ and the vertical obturation showed 4.875±3.555 μ∈ with significance difference of P<0.05 between the groups. Conclusion: It can be concluded that the abutments treated with vertical obturation techniques reduced the stresses induced to the supporting structures when compared with the lateral condensation technique. © 2021 University Library System, University of Pittsburgh. All rights reserved.