You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 2 Marginal gap before and after Cementation and resulting force between studied groups

From: Impact of implant abutment materials on force damping response and marginal fit of implant supported restoration

 

Marginal Gap before Cementation (µm)

Marginal Gap after Cementation

(µm)

Comparison between before & after

Resulting force

(N)

P-value

Shofu HC group

\(\overline{X }\)±S. D

29.35 ± 3.28

33.03 ± 3.65

0.021*

0.804 ± 0.034

Min–Max

24.43—35.71

27.22—37.22

0.750—0.845

Tessera group

\(\overline{X }\)±S. D

23.70 ± 2.99

30.80 ± 1.64

 < 0.001**

0.920 ± 0.041a

Min–Max

20.56—30.29

27.86—32.93

0.858—0.974

BioHpp group

\(\overline{X }\)±S. D

35.49 ± 4.78ab

46.47 ± 2.73ab

 < 0.001**

0.866 ± 0.035ab

Min–Max

27.38—41.11

42.25—50.34

0.805—0.907

Titanium group

\(\overline{X }\)±S. D

31.05 ± 8.34b

38.43 ± 7.52abc

0.066

0.970 ± 0.045abc

Min–Max

17.56—43.46

23.11—46.53

0.906—1.039

ANOVA test

 < 0.001**

 < 0.001**

––––-

0.001**

  1. Data presented as mean \(\overline{{\varvec{X}} }\)±S. D
  2. aP value compared to Shofu HC group
  3. bP value compared to Tessera group
  4. cP value compared to BioHpp group
  5. *Significant p value < 0.05
  6. *Significant p value < 0.05
  7. **Highly significant p value < 0.001