Deceles Cristina Costa Alves1, Paulo Sérgio Perri de Carvalho2, Carlos Nelson Elias3, Eduardo Vedovatto2, Elizabeth Ferreira Martinez4. 1. Oral Implantology, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil. dcca@terra.com.br. 2. Oral Implantology, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil. 3. Materials Science Department, Instituto Militar de Engenharia, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 4. Department of Oral Pathology, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the mechanical behavior and bacterial microleakage at the implant/abutment-tapered interface following mechanical cycling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two groups of screwless (Morse taper) implants (G1 and G2) and two groups of prosthetic screwed implants (G3 and G4) were tested. One group from each model (G2 and G4) were submitted to mechanical cycling, 500,000 cycles per sample, at a load of 120 N at 2 Hz prior to analysis. Microbiological analysis was performed via immersion of all samples in an Escherichia coli-containing suspension, incubated at 37 °C. After 14 days, the abutments were removed from their respective implants, registering the removal force (G1 and G2) or reverse torque (G3 and G4), and the presence of bacterial leakage was evaluated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed to analyze the tapered surfaces of the selected samples. The Student t, binomial, and G tests were used for statistical analysis at a 5 % significance level. RESULTS: The results showed no significant difference between removal force, reverse torque, and contamination values when comparing implants of the same type. However, when the four groups were compared, contamination differed significantly (p = 0.044), with G1 having the least number of contaminated samples (8.3 %). SEM analysis showed superficial defects and damage. CONCLUSIONS: The abutment removal force or torque was not affected by mechanical cycling. Bacterial sealing of the implant/abutment tapered interface was not effective for any condition analyzed. Imprecise machining of implant parts does not allow a sufficient contact area between surfaces to provide effective sealing and prevent bacterial leakage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The microscopic gap caused by unsatisfactory implant/abutment adaptation, surface irregularities, and plastic deformation of all parts enabled bacterial contamination of the oral implants.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the mechanical behavior and bacterial microleakage at the implant/abutment-tapered interface following mechanical cycling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two groups of screwless (Morse taper) implants (G1 and G2) and two groups of prosthetic screwed implants (G3 and G4) were tested. One group from each model (G2 and G4) were submitted to mechanical cycling, 500,000 cycles per sample, at a load of 120 N at 2 Hz prior to analysis. Microbiological analysis was performed via immersion of all samples in an Escherichia coli-containing suspension, incubated at 37 °C. After 14 days, the abutments were removed from their respective implants, registering the removal force (G1 and G2) or reverse torque (G3 and G4), and the presence of bacterial leakage was evaluated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed to analyze the tapered surfaces of the selected samples. The Student t, binomial, and G tests were used for statistical analysis at a 5 % significance level. RESULTS: The results showed no significant difference between removal force, reverse torque, and contamination values when comparing implants of the same type. However, when the four groups were compared, contamination differed significantly (p = 0.044), with G1 having the least number of contaminated samples (8.3 %). SEM analysis showed superficial defects and damage. CONCLUSIONS: The abutment removal force or torque was not affected by mechanical cycling. Bacterial sealing of the implant/abutment tapered interface was not effective for any condition analyzed. Imprecise machining of implant parts does not allow a sufficient contact area between surfaces to provide effective sealing and prevent bacterial leakage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The microscopic gap caused by unsatisfactory implant/abutment adaptation, surface irregularities, and plastic deformation of all parts enabled bacterial contamination of the oral implants.
Authors: Tatjana Rack; Tanja Rack; Simon Zabler; Alexander Rack; Heinrich Riesemeier; Katja Nelson Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Date: 2013 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Peter Gehrke; Simon Burg; Ulrike Peters; Thomas Beikler; Carsten Fischer; Frank Rupp; Ernst Schweizer; Paul Weigl; Robert Sader; Ralf Smeets; Sogand Schäfer Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-08-16 Impact factor: 3.573