PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to evaluate screw removal torque of the two-piece zirconia abutment with the novel titanium component compared to the conventional one-piece titanium abutment in the internal connection implant before and after dynamic cyclic loading.
Materials and methods
Two types of the abutment assemblies with internal connection were prepared and divided into the groups; titanium abutment-titanium abutment screw assemblies as control, and zirconia abutment-titanium socket-titanium abutment screw assemblies as experimental group. A total of 12 abutments and implants were used of six assemblies each group. Each assembly was tightened to 30 Ncm. A cyclic load of 300 N at an angle of 30 degrees in reference to the loading axis was applied until one million cycles or failure. The removal torque values (RTVs) of the abutment screws were measured with a digital torque gauge before and after cyclic loading. The RTVs of the pre load and post load were analyzed with t-test, and P-values < .05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
The assemblies of both groups survived all after the dynamic cyclic loading test without screw loosening. The statistically significant differences were found between the mean RTVs before and after the cyclic loading in both groups (P < .05). The RTV differences for the control and the experimental group were -7.25 ± 1.50 Ncm and -7.33 ± 0.93 Ncm, respectively. Statistical analysis revealed that the RTV differences in both groups were not significantly different from each other (P > .05).
REFERENCES
1.Prestipino V., Ingber A. Esthetic high-strength implant abutments. Part I. J Esthet Dent. 1993. 5:29–36.
2.Manicone PF., Rossi Iommetti P., Raffaelli L. An overview of zirconia ceramics: basic properties and clinical applications. J Dent. 2007. 35:819–26.
3.Yildirim M., Fischer H., Marx R., Edelhoff D. In vivo fracture resistance of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2003. 90:325–31.
4.Apholt W., Bindl A., Lüthy H., Mörmann WH. Flexural strength of Cerec 2 machined and jointed InCeram-Alumina and InCeram-Zirconia bars. Dent Mater. 2001. 17:260–7.
5.Adatia ND., Bayne SC., Cooper LF., Thompson JY. Fracture resistance of yttria-stabilized zirconia dental implant abutments. J Prosthodont. 2009. 18:17–22.
6.Sailer I., Sailer T., Stawarczyk B., Jung RE., Hämmerle CH. In vitro study of the influence of the type of connection on the fracture load of zirconia abutments with internal and external implant-abutment connections. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009. 24:850–8.
7.Gehrke P., Alius J., Fischer C., Erdelt KJ., Beuer F. Retentive strength of two-piece CAD/CAM zirconia implant abutments. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014. 16:920–5.
8.Chun HJ., Yeo IS., Lee JH., Kim SK., Heo SJ., Koak JY., Han JS., Lee SJ. Fracture strength study of internally connected zirconia abutments reinforced with titanium inserts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015. 30:346–50.
9.Theoharidou A., Petridis HP., Tzannas K., Garefis P. Abutment screw loosening in single-implant restorations: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008. 23:681–90.
10.Taylor TD. Prosthodontic problems and limitations associated with osseointegration. J Prosthet Dent. 1998. 79:74–8.
11.Stüker RA., Teixeira ER., Beck JC., da Costa NP. Preload and torque removal evaluation of three different abutment screws for single standing implant restorations. J Appl Oral Sci. 2008. 16:55–8.
12.Dhingra A., Weiner S., Luke AC., Ricci JL. Analysis of dimensional changes in the screw and the surface topography at the interface of a titanium screw and a zirconia abutment under cyclic loading: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013. 28:661–9.
13.Siamos G., Winkler S., Boberick KG. Relationship between implant preload and screw loosening on implant-supported prostheses. J Oral Implantol. 2002. 28:67–73.
14.Tsuge T., Hagiwara Y. Influence of lateral-oblique cyclic loading on abutment screw loosening of internal and external hexagon implants. Dent Mater J. 2009. 28:373–81.
15.Craig RG. Restorative dental materials,. 9th ed.Mosby, St. Louis;1993. p. 75–7.
16.Att W., Kurun S., Gerds T., Strub JR. Fracture resistance of single-tooth implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2006. 95:111–6.
17.Dittmer MP., Dittmer S., Borchers L., Kohorst P., Stiesch M. Influence of the interface design on the yield force of the implant-abutment complex before and after cyclic mechanical loading. J Prosthodont Res. 2012. 56:19–24.
18.Khraisat A., Abu-Hammad O., Dar-Odeh N., Al-Kayed AM. Abutment screw loosening and bending resistance of external hexagon implant system after lateral cyclic loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2004. 6:157–64.
19.Khraisat A., Hashimoto A., Nomura S., Miyakawa O. Effect of lateral cyclic loading on abutment screw loosening of an external hexagon implant system. J Prosthet Dent. 2004. 91:326–34.
20.Gracis S., Michalakis K., Vigolo P., Vult von Steyern P., Zwahlen M., Sailer I. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/re-constructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012. 23:202–16.
21.Delben JA., Barão VA., Ferreira MB., da Silva NR., Thompson VP., Assunção WG. Influence of abutment-to-fixture design on reliability and failure mode of all-ceramic crown systems. Dent Mater. 2014. 30:408–16.
22.Kim JS., Raigrodski AJ., Flinn BD., Rubenstein JE., Chung KH., Mancl LA. In vitro assessment of three types of zirconia implant abutments under static load. J Prosthet Dent. 2013. 109:255–63.
23.Dixon DL., Breeding LC., Sadler JP., McKay ML. Comparison of screw loosening, rotation, and deflection among three implant designs. J Prosthet Dent. 1995. 74:270–8.
XML Download