Cargando…

Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro

Purpose : To assess implant leakage under static conditions as well as during and after dynamic loading. Materials and methods : Implants (Astra Tech (A), Biomet 3i (B) and Nobel Biocare (C)) were evaluated for leakage (n=8/group). Testing to assess the gas pressure change over time (hPa/min) and in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Al-Jadaa, Anas, Attin, Thomas, Peltomäki, Timo, Heumann, Christian, Schmidlin, Patrick Roger
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bentham Open 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4391209/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25870719
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874210601509010112
_version_ 1782365783906582528
author Al-Jadaa, Anas
Attin, Thomas
Peltomäki, Timo
Heumann, Christian
Schmidlin, Patrick Roger
author_facet Al-Jadaa, Anas
Attin, Thomas
Peltomäki, Timo
Heumann, Christian
Schmidlin, Patrick Roger
author_sort Al-Jadaa, Anas
collection PubMed
description Purpose : To assess implant leakage under static conditions as well as during and after dynamic loading. Materials and methods : Implants (Astra Tech (A), Biomet 3i (B) and Nobel Biocare (C)) were evaluated for leakage (n=8/group). Testing to assess the gas pressure change over time (hPa/min) and infiltrated fluid volume, was performed in a Gas Enhanced Permeation Test (GEPT) to qualify embedding. Implant apexes were then drilled, abutments were mounted and resin build-ups were fabricated. GEPT was reassessed. Samples were afterward mounted in a computer-controlled masticator while tested to bacterial leakage, they were daily observed for turbidity. Samples were then reassessed using GEPT. Dunnett's and Fisher's exact tests were utilized to compare implant and to analyze bacterial leakage. Results : Significant differences in GEPT values were shown after loading (p=0.034). Leakage resistance was best for B when compared to C (p=0.023). Samples with higher GEPT values demonstrated earlier bacterial leakage, occurring after 1 or 2 days (A=4, B=0, C=6) and showing favorability for implant system B (p=0.009). Conclusion : Implants leaking under static conditions had increased potential for bacterial leakage under dynamic conditions. As strongly correlating to sophisticated analytical methods, GEPT is a promising technique for assessing the overall implant system leakage resistance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4391209
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Bentham Open
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43912092015-04-13 Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro Al-Jadaa, Anas Attin, Thomas Peltomäki, Timo Heumann, Christian Schmidlin, Patrick Roger Open Dent J Article Purpose : To assess implant leakage under static conditions as well as during and after dynamic loading. Materials and methods : Implants (Astra Tech (A), Biomet 3i (B) and Nobel Biocare (C)) were evaluated for leakage (n=8/group). Testing to assess the gas pressure change over time (hPa/min) and infiltrated fluid volume, was performed in a Gas Enhanced Permeation Test (GEPT) to qualify embedding. Implant apexes were then drilled, abutments were mounted and resin build-ups were fabricated. GEPT was reassessed. Samples were afterward mounted in a computer-controlled masticator while tested to bacterial leakage, they were daily observed for turbidity. Samples were then reassessed using GEPT. Dunnett's and Fisher's exact tests were utilized to compare implant and to analyze bacterial leakage. Results : Significant differences in GEPT values were shown after loading (p=0.034). Leakage resistance was best for B when compared to C (p=0.023). Samples with higher GEPT values demonstrated earlier bacterial leakage, occurring after 1 or 2 days (A=4, B=0, C=6) and showing favorability for implant system B (p=0.009). Conclusion : Implants leaking under static conditions had increased potential for bacterial leakage under dynamic conditions. As strongly correlating to sophisticated analytical methods, GEPT is a promising technique for assessing the overall implant system leakage resistance. Bentham Open 2015-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4391209/ /pubmed/25870719 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874210601509010112 Text en © Al-Jadaa et al.; Licensee Bentham Open. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Article
Al-Jadaa, Anas
Attin, Thomas
Peltomäki, Timo
Heumann, Christian
Schmidlin, Patrick Roger
Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro
title Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro
title_full Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro
title_fullStr Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro
title_short Impact of Dynamic Loading on the Implant-abutment Interface Using a Gas-enhanced Permeation Test In Vitro
title_sort impact of dynamic loading on the implant-abutment interface using a gas-enhanced permeation test in vitro
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4391209/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25870719
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874210601509010112
work_keys_str_mv AT aljadaaanas impactofdynamicloadingontheimplantabutmentinterfaceusingagasenhancedpermeationtestinvitro
AT attinthomas impactofdynamicloadingontheimplantabutmentinterfaceusingagasenhancedpermeationtestinvitro
AT peltomakitimo impactofdynamicloadingontheimplantabutmentinterfaceusingagasenhancedpermeationtestinvitro
AT heumannchristian impactofdynamicloadingontheimplantabutmentinterfaceusingagasenhancedpermeationtestinvitro
AT schmidlinpatrickroger impactofdynamicloadingontheimplantabutmentinterfaceusingagasenhancedpermeationtestinvitro