Cargando…

Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs

BACKGROUND: To assess the effect of implantoplasty and implant-abutment design on the fracture resistance and macroscopic morphology of narrow-diameter (3.5 mm) dental implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Screw-shaped titanium dental implants (n = 48) were studied in vitro. Three groups (n = 16) were est...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Camps-Font, Octavi, González-Barnadas, Albert, Mir-Mari, Javier, Figueiredo, Rui, Gay-Escoda, Cosme, Valmaseda-Castellón, Eduard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7473443/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32683385
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.23700
_version_ 1783579184273031168
author Camps-Font, Octavi
González-Barnadas, Albert
Mir-Mari, Javier
Figueiredo, Rui
Gay-Escoda, Cosme
Valmaseda-Castellón, Eduard
author_facet Camps-Font, Octavi
González-Barnadas, Albert
Mir-Mari, Javier
Figueiredo, Rui
Gay-Escoda, Cosme
Valmaseda-Castellón, Eduard
author_sort Camps-Font, Octavi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To assess the effect of implantoplasty and implant-abutment design on the fracture resistance and macroscopic morphology of narrow-diameter (3.5 mm) dental implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Screw-shaped titanium dental implants (n = 48) were studied in vitro. Three groups (n = 16) were established, based on implant-abutment connection type: external hexagon, internal hexagon and conical. Eight implants from each group were subjected to an implantoplasty procedure; the remaining 8 implants served as controls. Implant wall thickness was recorded. All samples were subjected to a static strength test. RESULTS: The mean wall thickness reductions varied between 106.46 and 153.75 µm. The mean fracture strengths for the control and test groups were, respectively, 1211.90±89.95 N and 873.11±92.37 N in the external hexagon implants; 918.41±97.19 N and 661.29±58.03 N in the internal hexagon implants; and 1058.67±114.05 N and 747.32±90.05 N in the conical connection implants. Implant wall thickness and fracture resistance (P < 0.001) showed a positive correlation. Fracture strength was influenced by both implantoplasty (P < 0.001) and connection type (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Implantoplasty in diameter-reduced implants decreases implant wall thickness and fracture resistance, and varies depending on the implant-abutment connection. Internal hexagon and conical connection implants seem to be more prone to fracture after implantoplasty. Key words:Dental implants, narrow diameter, implant connection, peri-implantitis, implantoplasty, fracture strength.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7473443
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74734432020-09-09 Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs Camps-Font, Octavi González-Barnadas, Albert Mir-Mari, Javier Figueiredo, Rui Gay-Escoda, Cosme Valmaseda-Castellón, Eduard Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Research BACKGROUND: To assess the effect of implantoplasty and implant-abutment design on the fracture resistance and macroscopic morphology of narrow-diameter (3.5 mm) dental implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Screw-shaped titanium dental implants (n = 48) were studied in vitro. Three groups (n = 16) were established, based on implant-abutment connection type: external hexagon, internal hexagon and conical. Eight implants from each group were subjected to an implantoplasty procedure; the remaining 8 implants served as controls. Implant wall thickness was recorded. All samples were subjected to a static strength test. RESULTS: The mean wall thickness reductions varied between 106.46 and 153.75 µm. The mean fracture strengths for the control and test groups were, respectively, 1211.90±89.95 N and 873.11±92.37 N in the external hexagon implants; 918.41±97.19 N and 661.29±58.03 N in the internal hexagon implants; and 1058.67±114.05 N and 747.32±90.05 N in the conical connection implants. Implant wall thickness and fracture resistance (P < 0.001) showed a positive correlation. Fracture strength was influenced by both implantoplasty (P < 0.001) and connection type (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Implantoplasty in diameter-reduced implants decreases implant wall thickness and fracture resistance, and varies depending on the implant-abutment connection. Internal hexagon and conical connection implants seem to be more prone to fracture after implantoplasty. Key words:Dental implants, narrow diameter, implant connection, peri-implantitis, implantoplasty, fracture strength. Medicina Oral S.L. 2020-09 2020-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7473443/ /pubmed/32683385 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.23700 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Camps-Font, Octavi
González-Barnadas, Albert
Mir-Mari, Javier
Figueiredo, Rui
Gay-Escoda, Cosme
Valmaseda-Castellón, Eduard
Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
title Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
title_full Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
title_fullStr Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
title_full_unstemmed Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
title_short Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
title_sort fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7473443/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32683385
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.23700
work_keys_str_mv AT campsfontoctavi fractureresistanceafterimplantoplastyinthreeimplantabutmentconnectiondesigns
AT gonzalezbarnadasalbert fractureresistanceafterimplantoplastyinthreeimplantabutmentconnectiondesigns
AT mirmarijavier fractureresistanceafterimplantoplastyinthreeimplantabutmentconnectiondesigns
AT figueiredorui fractureresistanceafterimplantoplastyinthreeimplantabutmentconnectiondesigns
AT gayescodacosme fractureresistanceafterimplantoplastyinthreeimplantabutmentconnectiondesigns
AT valmasedacastelloneduard fractureresistanceafterimplantoplastyinthreeimplantabutmentconnectiondesigns