Fracture and Fatigue of Dental Implants Fixtures and Abutments with a Novel Internal Connection Design: An In Vitro Pilot Study Comparing Three Different Dental Implant Systems

被引:5
作者
On, Sung-Woon [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Yi, Sang-Min [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Park, In-Young [2 ,3 ,5 ]
Byun, Soo-Hwan [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Yang, Byoung-Eun [2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Hallym Univ, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hosp, Dept Dent, Div Oral & Maxillofacial Surg,Coll Med, Hwaseong 18450, South Korea
[2] Hallym Univ, Grad Sch Clin Dent, Chunchon 24252, South Korea
[3] Hallym Univ, Inst Clin Dent, Chunchon 24252, South Korea
[4] Hallym Univ, Coll Med, Sacred Heart Hosp, Div Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Anyang 14066, South Korea
[5] Hallym Univ, Coll Med, Div Orthodont, Sacred Heart Hosp, Anyang 14066, South Korea
关键词
Torx connection; BLX; TORX plus plus; IU; dental implant; mechanical properties; COMPLICATION RATES; SURVIVAL; SURFACE;
D O I
10.3390/jfb13040239
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
The aim of this study was to compare the mechanical behaviors of three dental implant fixtures with different abutment connection designs. Three implant systems were studied: the control (BLX implant), test group 1 (TORX++ implant), and test group 2 (IU implant). Three samples from each group were subjected to static compression to fracture tests to determine the maximum fracture load, and twelve samples were exposed to fatigue tests that measured how many cycles the implants could endure before deformation or fracture. Detailed images of the implant-abutment assemblies were obtained using micro-computed tomography imaging, and fractured or deformed areas were observed using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The mean maximum breaking loads of 578.45 +/- 42.46 N, 793.26 +/- 57.43 N, and 862.30 +/- 74.25 N were obtained for the BLX, TORX++, and IU implants, respectively. All samples in the three groups withstood 5 x 10(6) cycles at 50% of the nominal peak value, and different fracture points were observed. All abutment connection designs showed suitable mechanical properties for intraoral use. Microscopic differences in the fracture patterns may be due to the differences in the fixture design or abutment connection, and mechanical complications could be prevented by lowering the overload reaching the implant or preventing peri-implantitis.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2016, 148012016EN ISO
  • [2] Effects of Different Abutment Connection Designs on the Stress Distribution Around Five Different Implants: A 3-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
    Balik, Ali
    Karatas, Meltem Ozdemir
    Keskin, Haluk
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY, 2012, 38 (01) : 491 - 496
  • [3] Bernhard N, 2020, FORUM IMPLANT, V22, P30
  • [4] 10-Year Survival and Success Rates of 511 Titanium Implants with a Sandblasted and Acid-Etched Surface: A Retrospective Study in 303 Partially Edentulous Patients
    Buser, Daniel
    Janner, Simone F. M.
    Wittneben, Julia-Gabriela
    Braegger, Urs
    Ramseier, Christoph A.
    Salvi, Giovanni E.
    [J]. CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2012, 14 (06) : 839 - 851
  • [5] Improvement in Fatigue Behavior of Dental Implant Fixtures by Changing Internal Connection Design: An In Vitro Pilot Study
    Choi, Nak-Hyun
    Yoon, Hyung-In
    Kim, Tae-Hyung
    Park, Eun-Jin
    [J]. MATERIALS, 2019, 12 (19)
  • [6] Effect of loading frequency on cyclic fatigue lifetime of a standard-diameter implant with an internal abutment connection
    Duan, Yuanyuan
    Griggs, Jason A.
    [J]. DENTAL MATERIALS, 2018, 34 (12) : 1711 - 1716
  • [7] LIMITS OF HUMAN BITE STRENGTH
    GIBBS, CH
    MAHAN, PE
    MAUDERLI, A
    LUNDEEN, HC
    WALSH, EK
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 1986, 56 (02) : 226 - 229
  • [8] Helkimo E., 1959, J DENT RES, V29, P133
  • [9] Huang HM, 2005, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V20, P854
  • [10] A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns
    Jung, Ronald E.
    Pjetursson, Bjarni E.
    Glauser, Roland
    Zembic, Anja
    Zwahlen, Marcel
    Lang, Niklaus P.
    [J]. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2008, 19 (02) : 119 - 130