Introduction
Tilted implants were suggested as a treatment option for sever bone resorption. The use of angle correcting attachments is a must in the cases of tilted implants.
Objectives
Comparing the micro strain around tilted implants and axial implants placed according to the all on four concept which were connected to two different attachment designs using.
Material and methods
Identical maxillary epoxy resin models were used. Four implants were placed in each model. The two anterior axial implants in the incisors area and two posterior 25-degree tilted implants in the canine – premolar area. For Group I model OT-Equator attachment were connected to all four implants and smart box female housing will be used on posterior tilted implants for angle correction. for Group II model Straight Positioner attachments connected to anterior parallel implants and angulated Positioner attachment connected to posterior tilted implants. Two strain gauges were placed mesial and distal to each implant. A universal testing machine and strain meter were used to evaluate microstrain after load application.
Results
There were statistically significant higher microstrain values around tilted implants when compared to micro strain values around axial implants of both groups. There was no statistically significant difference when comparing micro strain around tilted implants and axial implants of both groups.
Conclusions
There was no difference in micro-strain around tilted implants connected to both attachment designs. the tilted implants showed microstrain values higher than axial ones in both groups. Tilting the implants was associated with unequal force distribution.