Literature DB >> 16035348

Use of abutment-teeth vs. dental implants to support all-ceramic fixed partial dentures: an in-vitro study on fracture strength.

Per Vult von Steyern1, Yuji Kokubo, Krister Nilner.   

Abstract

The aim of the present in-vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of all-ceramic Fixed Partial Dentures supported by tooth-analogues and periodontal membrane with the same supported by dental implants. As ceramics are highly brittle, they cannot withstand deformations of more than 0.1% without fracturing. Hence, when planning an all-ceramic FPD, it is essential to evaluate abutment support, as the fracture strength of all-ceramic constructions depends on the stability of the support to reduce strain in the beam of the prosthesis. The support provided by implants differs, however, from the support provided by natural teeth as the implants are anchored directly in the bone with no intermediate tissue. One question that arises is whether strain and stress in the prosthesis are lower when the prosthesis is loaded on implants compared to natural teeth and hence if all-ceramic FPDs benefit from implant support. Twenty-four three-unit all-ceramic FPDs-12 supported by two dental implants and 12 by two tooth-analogues serving as end abutments-were made. All FPDs were subjected to preloading in a preloading procedure and subsequently subjected to load until fracture occurred. Load at fracture were registered and comparisons between the two groups were made. The loads at fracture were statistically significant higher in the group supported by implants compared to the group supported by tooth-analogues (p = 0.003). Within the limitations of this in-vitro study, the following conclusions can be drawn: All-ceramic fixed partial dentures can be used in combination with dental implants. The solid support gained from implants might thus be beneficial for the outcome of such treatment due to decreased strain and stress levels in the prosthesis when loaded on implants compared to when loaded on natural teeth. Clinical studies are, however, needed to confirm these findings as there are more factors that influence the final clinical outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16035348

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Swed Dent J        ISSN: 0347-9994


  5 in total

1.  Load-bearing capacity of artificially aged zirconia fixed dental prostheses with heterogeneous abutment supports.

Authors:  Katia Sarafidou; Meike Stiesch; Marc Philipp Dittmer; Daniela Jörn; Lothar Borchers; Philipp Kohorst
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Fracture load of three-unit full-contour fixed dental prostheses fabricated with subtractive and additive CAD/CAM technology.

Authors:  Moritz Zimmermann; Andreas Ender; Thomas Attin; Albert Mehl
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Fracture analysis of randomized implant-supported fixed dental prostheses.

Authors:  Josephine F Esquivel-Upshaw; Alex Mehler; Arthur E Clark; Dan Neal; Kenneth J Anusavice
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2014-07-09       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Randomized clinical trial of implant-supported ceramic-ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses: preliminary results.

Authors:  Josephine F Esquivel-Upshaw; Arthur E Clark; Jonathan J Shuster; Kenneth J Anusavice
Journal:  J Prosthodont       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 2.752

5.  Fracture behavior of all-ceramic, implant-supported, and tooth-implant-supported fixed dental prostheses.

Authors:  Abdul Rahman Alkharrat; Marc Schmitter; Stefan Rues; Peter Rammelsberg
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 3.573

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.