PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2023; 17(01): 062-069
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1742124
Original Article

Fatigue Resistance of Cast-on Implant Abutment Fabricated with Three Different Alloys

Usanee Puengpaiboon
1   Department of General Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand
,
Pavinee Padipatvuthikul Didron
1   Department of General Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand
› Institutsangaben Funding This study was financially supported by the Faculty of Dentistry, Srinakharinwirot University, Thailand (grant no. 3232/2018).
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate fatigue resistance of cast-on implant abutment using three alloys.

Materials and Methods Forty specimens of implant-supported crowns were prepared; Group 1 (TA) stock titanium abutments, Group 2 (GS) abutment cast with 40% gold alloy, Group 3 (GP) abutment cast with palladium alloy, and Group 4 (CN) abutment cast with nickel–chromium alloy. Specimens were cyclic loaded at 20 Hz, starting from 200 N (5,000 cycles), followed by stepwise loading of 400, 600, 800, 1,000, 1,200, 1,400, 1,600, and 1,800 N (30,000 cycles/step). Specimens were loaded until failure or reached 245,000 cycles.

Statistical Analysis The withstand cycles were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Weibull survival analysis. Fracture surfaces were examined using scanning electron microscopy.

Results The results of withstand cycles were TA (189,883 ± 22,734), GS (195,028 ± 22,371), GP (187,662 ± 22,555), and CN (200,350 ± 30,851). The statistical analysis showed no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.673).

Conclusion Although CN has higher Weibull characteristic strength which means greater durability, its lower Weibull modulus demonstrated less structural reliability. Consistent failures at implant fixture level were also found in CN group.

Keywords

dental implant - cast-on abutment - fatigue resistance - mechanical failure


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
23. Februar 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Barbosa GAS, das Neves FD, de Mattos MdaGC, Rodrigues RCS, Ribeiro RF. Implant/abutment vertical misfit of one-piece cast frameworks made with different materials. Braz Dent J 2010; 21 (06) 515-519
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Yun MJ, Jeon YC, Jeong CM, Huh JB. Comparison of the fit of cast gold crowns fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression techniques. J Adv Prosthodont 2017; 9 (01) 1-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hulterström M, Nilsson U. Cobalt-chromium as a framework material in implant-supported fixed prostheses: a preliminary report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991; 6 (04) 475-480
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Barbosa GAS, Simamoto Júnior PC, Fernandes Neto AJ, de Mattos MdaGC, das Neves FD. Prosthetic laboratory influence on the vertical misfit at the implant/UCLA abutment interface. Braz Dent J 2007; 18 (02) 139-143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Woodward B. Palladium in temporary and permanently implantable medical devices. Johnson Matthey 2012; 56 (03) 213-217
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Kano SC, Binon PP, Bonfante G, Curtis DA. The effect of casting procedures on rotational misfit in castable abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22 (04) 575-579
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Ucer C. A Dentist's Guide to Implantology. ADI 2012: 1-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Eckert SE, Wollan PC. Retrospective review of 1170 endosseous implants placed in partially edentulous jaws. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79 (04) 415-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kano SC, Binon PP, Curtis DA. A classification system to measure the implant-abutment microgap. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22 (06) 879-885
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Yamaguchi S, Yamanishi Y, Machado LS. et al. In vitro fatigue tests and in silico finite element analysis of dental implants with different fixture/abutment joint types using computer-aided design models. J Prosthodont Res 2018; 62 (01) 24-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kelly JR, Benetti P, Rungruanganunt P, Bona AD. The slippery slope: critical perspectives on in vitro research methodologies. Dent Mater 2012; 28 (01) 41-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Elsayed A, Wille S, Al-Akhali M, Kern M. Effect of fatigue loading on the fracture strength and failure mode of lithium disilicate and zirconia implant abutments. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29 (01) 20-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Quek HC, Tan KB, Nicholls JI. Load fatigue performance of four implant-abutment interface designs: effect of torque level and implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23 (02) 253-262
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Fraga S, Pereira GKR, Freitas M, Kleverlaan CJ, Valandro LF, May LG. Loading frequencies up to 20Hz as an alternative to accelerate fatigue strength tests in a Y-TZP ceramic. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2016; 61: 79-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Jivraj S. Screw versus cemented implant restorations: the decision-making process. J Dent Implant 2018; 8 (01) 9-19
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Shadid R, Sadaqa N. A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review. J Oral Implantol 2012; 38 (03) 298-307
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Chee W, Jivraj S. Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations. Br Dent J 2006; 201 (08) 501-507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Dentistry-Implants-Dynamic loading test for endosseous dental implants. ISO 14801:2016; ISO: London, United Kingdom: 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Kaweewongprasert P, Phasuk K, Levon JA. et al. Fatigue failure load of lithium disilicate restorations cemented on a chairside titanium- base. J Prosthodont 2019; 28 (09) 973-981
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Magne P, Schlichting LH, Maia HP, Baratieri LN. In vitro fatigue resistance of CAD/CAM composite resin and ceramic posterior occlusal veneers. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 104 (03) 149-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Foong JK, Judge RB, Palamara JE, Swain MV. Fracture resistance of titanium and zirconia abutments: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109 (05) 304-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Boff LL, Oderich E, Cardoso AC, Magne P. Fatigue resistance and failure mode of adhesively restored custom metal-composite resin premolar implant abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29 (02) 364-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Molina I, Goldberg J, Volpato CM, Magne P. Accelerated fatigue resistance of novel-design histoanatomic implant restorations made of CAD/CAM bilaminar assemblies. Int J Esthet Dent 2017; 12 (03) 336-351
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Zahran M, El-Mowafy O, Tam L, Watson PA, Finer Y. Fracture strength and fatigue resistance of all-ceramic molar crowns manufactured with CAD/CAM technology. J Prosthodont 2008; 17 (05) 370-377
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Bonfante EA, Coelho PG. A critical perspective on mechanical testing of implants and prostheses. Adv Dent Res 2016; 28 (01) 18-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Pjetursson BE, Asgeirsson AG, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Improvements in implant dentistry over the last decade: comparison of survival and complication rates in older and newer publications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29 (Suppl): 308-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Lee CK, Karl M, Kelly JR. Evaluation of test protocol variables for dental implant fatigue research. Dent Mater 2009; 25 (11) 1419-1425
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Atieh R. Fatigue testing of straight and angled abutments in a high torque dental implant system [dissertation]. Birmingham: The University of Alabama; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Shirazi M, Memarian M, Alikhasi M. et al. Effect of angle and type of customized abutment (castable & cast-to) on torque loss and fracture resistance after cyclic loading. Open Dent J 2018; 12: 987-994
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Souza JCM, Henriques M, Teughels W. et al. Wear and corrosion interactions on titanium in oral environment: literature review. J Bio Tribo Corros 2015; 1 (02) 1-13
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Poovarodom P, Sae-Lee D, Suriyawanakul J. The 3D finite element analysis of stress distribution in implant supported single crown with different abutment designs. EASR 2018; 45 (03) 240-250
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Dogus SM, Kurtz KS, Watanabe I, Griggs JA. Effect of engaging abutment position in implant-borne, screw-retained three-unit fixed cantilevered prostheses. J Prosthodont 2011; 20 (05) 348-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Gil FJ, Fernández E, Manero JM. et al. A study of the abrasive resistance of metal alloys with applications in dental prosthetic fixators. Biomed Mater Eng 1995; 5 (03) 161-167
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Iwabuchi A, Lee JW, Uchidate M. Synergistic effect of fretting wear and sliding wear of Co-alloy and Ti-alloy in Hanks' solution. Wear 2007; 263 (01) 492-500
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Tuna SH, Pekmez NÖ, Keyf F, Canli F. The influence of the pure metal components of four different casting alloys on the electrochemical properties of the alloys. Dent Mater 2009; 25 (09) 1096-1103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Wataha JC. Biocompatibility of dental casting alloys: a review. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83 (02) 223-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Milheiro A, Muris J, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Influence of shape and finishing on the corrosion of palladium-based dental alloys. J Adv Prosthodont 2015; 7 (01) 56-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Faurschou A, Menné T, Johansen JD, Thyssen JP. Metal allergen of the 21st century–a review on exposure, epidemiology and clinical manifestations of palladium allergy. Contact Dermat 2011; 64 (04) 185-195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Durosaro O, el-Azhary RA. A 10-year retrospective study on palladium sensitivity. Dermatitis 2009; 20 (04) 208-213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Katoh N, Hirano S, Kishimoto S, Yasuno H. Dermal contact dermatitis caused by allergy to palladium. Contact Dermat 1999; 40 (04) 226-227
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Todd DJ, Burrows D. Patch testing with pure palladium metal in patients with sensitivity to palladium chloride. Contact Dermat 1992; 26 (05) 327-331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Taher NM, Al Jabab AS. Galvanic corrosion behavior of implant suprastructure dental alloys. Dent Mater 2003; 19 (01) 54-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Lee JJ, Song KY, Ahn SG, Choi JY, Seo JM, Park JM. Evaluation of effect of galvanic corrosion between nickel-chromium metal and titanium on ion release and cell toxicity. J Adv Prosthodont 2015; 7 (02) 172-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Kummer FJ, Rose RM. Corrosion of titanium/cobalt-chromium alloy couples. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983; 65 (08) 1125-1126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Rostoker W, Galante JO, Lereim P. Evaluation of couple/crevice corrosion by prosthetic alloys under in vivo conditions. J Biomed Mater Res 1978; 12 (06) 823-829
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Pereira LMS, Sordi MB, Magini RS, Calazans Duarte AR, Souza JCM. Abutment misfit in implant-supported prostheses manufactured by casting technique: an integrative review. Eur J Dent 2017; 11 (04) 553-558
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Lopes PA, Carreiro AFP, Nascimento RM, Vahey BR, Henriques B, Souza JCM. Physicochemical and microscopic characterization of implant-abutment joints. Eur J Dent 2018; 12 (01) 100-104
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Pereira PHS, Amaral M, Baroudi K, Vitti RP, Nassani MZ, Silva-Concílio LRD. Effect of implant platform connection and abutment material on removal torque and implant hexagon plastic deformation. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (03) 349-353
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar