Literature DB >> 33946477

Effect of Fabrication Technique on the Microgap of CAD/CAM Cobalt-Chrome and Zirconia Abutments on a Conical Connection Implant: An In Vitro Study.

Pedro Molinero-Mourelle1,2, Rocio Cascos-Sanchez1, Burak Yilmaz2,3, Walter Yu Hang Lam4, Edmond Ho Nang Pow4, Jaime Del Río Highsmith1, Miguel Gómez-Polo1.   

Abstract

The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the microgaps at the implant-abutment interface when zirconia (Zr) and CAD/CAM or cast Co-Cr abutments were used.
METHODS: Sixty-four conical connection implants and their abutments were divided into four groups (Co-Cr (milled, laser-sintered and castable) and Zirconia (milled)). After chewing simulation (300,000 cycles, under 200 N loads at 2 Hz at a 30° angle) and thermocycling (10,000 cycles, 5 to 50 °C, dwelling time 55 s), the implant-abutment microgap was measured 14 times at each of the four anatomical aspects on each specimen by using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Kruskal-Wallis and pair-wise comparison were used to analyze the data (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: The SEM analysis revealed smaller microgaps with Co-Cr milled abutments (0.69-8.39 μm) followed by Zr abutments (0.12-6.57 μm), Co-Cr sintered (7.31-25.7 μm) and cast Co-Cr (1.68-85.97 μm). Statistically significant differences were found between milled and cast Co-Cr, milled and laser-sintered Co-Cr, and between Zr and cast and laser-sintered Co-Cr (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The material and the abutment fabrication technique affected the implant-abutment microgap magnitude. The Zr and the milled Co-Cr presented smaller microgaps. Although the CAD/CAM abutments presented the most favorable values, all tested groups had microgaps within a range of 10 to 150 μm.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dental implant; dental implant abutment connection; dental implant–abutment design; implant–abutment interface; microgap

Year:  2021        PMID: 33946477     DOI: 10.3390/ma14092348

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Materials (Basel)        ISSN: 1996-1944            Impact factor:   3.623


  43 in total

1.  Marginal accuracy of three implant-ceramic abutment configurations.

Authors:  Marta Baldassarri; Jenni Hjerppe; Davide Romeo; Stefan Fickl; Van P Thompson; Christian F J Stappert
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2012 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.804

2.  A Comparison of Zirconia and Titanium Abutments for Microleakage.

Authors:  Mohamed I Abdelhamed; Jeffrey D Galley; Michael T Bailey; William M Johnston; Julie Holloway; Edwin McGlumphy; Binnaz Leblebicioglu
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 3.932

3.  Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone levels in non-submerged dental implants: a radiographic study in the canine mandible.

Authors:  Gaston N King; Joachim S Hermann; John D Schoolfield; Daniel Buser; David L Cochran
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.993

4.  Microbiological assessment of the implant-abutment interface in different connections: cross-sectional study after 5 years of functional loading.

Authors:  Luigi Canullo; David Penarrocha-Oltra; Claudio Soldini; Fabio Mazzocco; Maria Penarrocha; Ugo Covani
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 5.977

5.  Evaluation of the sealing capability of implants to titanium and zirconia abutments against Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Fusobacterium nucleatum under different screw torque values.

Authors:  Nicole A Smith; Ilser Turkyilmaz
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 3.426

Review 6.  Impact of prosthetic material on mid- and long-term outcome of dental implants supporting single crowns and fixed partial dentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Samir Abou-Ayash; Malin Strasding; Gerta Rücker; Wael Att
Journal:  Eur J Oral Implantol       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 3.123

Review 7.  The effect of zirconia or titanium as abutment material on soft peri-implant tissues: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tomas Linkevicius; Julius Vaitelis
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2015-06-13       Impact factor: 5.977

8.  A systematic review of survival of single implants as presented in longitudinal studies with a follow-up of at least 10 years.

Authors:  Lars Hjalmarsson; Maryam Gheisarifar; Torsten Jemt
Journal:  Eur J Oral Implantol       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 3.123

9.  Comparison of fit accuracy and torque maintenance of zirconia and titanium abutments for internal tri-channel and external-hex implant connections.

Authors:  Hakimeh Siadat; Elaheh Beyabanaki; Niloufar Mousavi; Marzieh Alikhasi
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 1.904

10.  Two-body wear behavior of human enamel versus monolithic zirconia, lithium disilicate, ceramometal and composite resin.

Authors:  Syed Rashid Habib; Abdulaziz Alotaibi; Nawaf Al Hazza; Yasser Allam; Mohammad AlGhazi
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 1.904

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Pros and Cons of CAD/CAM Technology for Infection Prevention in Dental Settings during COVID-19 Outbreak.

Authors:  Livia Barenghi; Alberto Barenghi; Umberto Garagiola; Alberto Di Blasio; Aldo Bruno Giannì; Francesco Spadari
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  Microleakage assessment of CAD-CAM Cobalt-Chrome and Zirconia abutments on a conical connection dental implant: A comparative in vitro study.

Authors:  Pedro Molinero-Mourelle; Andrea Roccuzzo; Burak Yilmaz; Walter Yu Hang Lam; Edmond H N Pow; Jaime Del Río Highsmith; Miguel Gómez-Polo
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 5.021

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.