Literature DB >> 23189296

Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems.

Francisco Martínez-Rus1, Alberto Ferreiroa, Mutlu Özcan, José F Bartolomé, Guillermo Pradíes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture resistance of all-ceramic crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Customized implant abutments for maxillary right central incisors made of titanium (Ti) and zirconia (Zr) (n=60, n=30 per group) were fabricated for an internal connection implant system. All-ceramic crowns were fabricated for their corresponding implant abutments using the following systems (n=10 per group): (1) monolithic computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) lithium disilicate (MLD); (2) pressed lithium disilicate (PLD); (3) yttrium stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (YTZP). The frameworks of both PLD and YTZP systems were manually veneered with a fluorapatite-based ceramic. The crowns were adhesively cemented to their implant abutments and loaded to fracture in a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/minute). Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (α=0.05).
RESULTS: Both the abutment material (P=.0001) and the ceramic crown system (P=.028) significantly affected the results. Interaction terms were not significant (P=.598). Ti-MLD (558.5±35 N) showed the highest mean fracture resistance among all abutment-crown combinations (340.3±62-495.9±53 N) (P<.05). Both MLD and veneered ceramic systems in combination with Ti abutments (558.5±35-495.9±53 N) presented significantly higher values than with Zr abutments (392.9±55-340.3±62 N) (P<.05). MLD crown system showed significantly higher mean fracture resistance compared to manually veneered ones on both Ti and Zr abutments (P<.05). While Ti-MLD and Ti-PLD abutment-crown combinations failed only in the crowns without abutment fractures, Zr-YTZP combination failed exclusively in the abutment without crown fracture. Zr-MLD and Zr-PLD failed predominantly in both the abutment and the crown. Ti-YTZP showed only implant neck distortion.
CONCLUSIONS: The highest fracture resistance was obtained with titanium abutments restored with MLD crowns, but the failure type was more favorable with Ti-YTZP combination.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23189296

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  4 in total

1.  Mechanical behavior of provisional implant prosthetic abutments.

Authors:  Rubén Agustín-Panadero; Blanca Serra-Pastor; Ana Roig-Vanaclocha; Juan-Luis Román-Rodriguez; Antonio Fons-Font
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2015-01-01

2.  Effects of Liner-Bonding of Implant-Supported Glass-Ceramic Crown to Zirconia Abutment on Bond Strength and Fracture Resistance.

Authors:  Yong-Seok Jang; Sang-Hoon Oh; Won-Suck Oh; Min-Ho Lee; Jung-Jin Lee; Tae-Sung Bae
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Fracture resistance and the mode of failure produced in metal-free crowns cemented onto zirconia abutments in dental implants.

Authors:  Rubén Agustín-Panadero; Blanca Serra-Pastor; Ana Roig-Vanaclocha; Antonio Fons-Font; María Fernanda Solá-Ruiz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Evaluation of biological changes at the proximal contacts between single-tooth implant-supported prosthesis and the adjacent natural teeth - An in vivo study.

Authors:  Maria Roseme Kandathilparambil; Vizaikumar Vasudha Nelluri; Bhanu Chander Vayadadi; Naveen Kumar Gajjam
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2020-10-08
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.