Cargando…

Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections

Introduction: Different implant–abutment connections have been developed to reduce mechanical and biological failure. The most frequent complications are loss of preload, screw loosening, abutment or implant fracture, deformations at the different interfaces, and bacterial microleakage. Aim: To revi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vinhas, Ana Sofia, Aroso, Carlos, Salazar, Filomena, López-Jarana, Paula, Ríos-Santos, José Vicente, Herrero-Climent, Mariano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7700386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33238476
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228685
_version_ 1783616267746279424
author Vinhas, Ana Sofia
Aroso, Carlos
Salazar, Filomena
López-Jarana, Paula
Ríos-Santos, José Vicente
Herrero-Climent, Mariano
author_facet Vinhas, Ana Sofia
Aroso, Carlos
Salazar, Filomena
López-Jarana, Paula
Ríos-Santos, José Vicente
Herrero-Climent, Mariano
author_sort Vinhas, Ana Sofia
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Different implant–abutment connections have been developed to reduce mechanical and biological failure. The most frequent complications are loss of preload, screw loosening, abutment or implant fracture, deformations at the different interfaces, and bacterial microleakage. Aim: To review the evidence indicating whether the implant–abutment connection type is significant regarding the following issues: (1) maintenance of the preload in static and dynamic in vitro studies; (2) assessment of possible deformations at the implant–abutment interfaces, after repeated application of the tightening torque; (3) evaluation of the sealing capability of different implant connections against microleakage. Materials and Methods: In June 2020, an electronic literature search was performed in Medline, EBSCO host, and PubMed databases. The search was focused on the ability of different implant connections to maintain preload, resist deformation after tightening and retightening, and prevent microleakage. The related titles and abstracts available in English were screened, and the articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected for full-text reading. Results: The literature search conducted for this review initially resulted in 68 articles, among which 19 articles and 1 systematic review fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. The studies were divided according to the three proposed objectives, with some studies falling into more than one category (maintenance of preload, surface abutment–implant deformation, and resistance to microleakage). Conclusions: Conical abutment appears to result in fewer mechanical complications, such as screw loosening or fractures, and higher torque preservation. After SEM evaluation, damage was observed in the threads of the abutment screws, before and after loading in internal and external connections. Internal hexagon implants and predominantly internal conical (Morse taper) implants showed less microleakage in dynamic loading conditions. We suggest further studies to guarantee excellence in methodological quality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7700386
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77003862020-11-30 Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections Vinhas, Ana Sofia Aroso, Carlos Salazar, Filomena López-Jarana, Paula Ríos-Santos, José Vicente Herrero-Climent, Mariano Int J Environ Res Public Health Review Introduction: Different implant–abutment connections have been developed to reduce mechanical and biological failure. The most frequent complications are loss of preload, screw loosening, abutment or implant fracture, deformations at the different interfaces, and bacterial microleakage. Aim: To review the evidence indicating whether the implant–abutment connection type is significant regarding the following issues: (1) maintenance of the preload in static and dynamic in vitro studies; (2) assessment of possible deformations at the implant–abutment interfaces, after repeated application of the tightening torque; (3) evaluation of the sealing capability of different implant connections against microleakage. Materials and Methods: In June 2020, an electronic literature search was performed in Medline, EBSCO host, and PubMed databases. The search was focused on the ability of different implant connections to maintain preload, resist deformation after tightening and retightening, and prevent microleakage. The related titles and abstracts available in English were screened, and the articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected for full-text reading. Results: The literature search conducted for this review initially resulted in 68 articles, among which 19 articles and 1 systematic review fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. The studies were divided according to the three proposed objectives, with some studies falling into more than one category (maintenance of preload, surface abutment–implant deformation, and resistance to microleakage). Conclusions: Conical abutment appears to result in fewer mechanical complications, such as screw loosening or fractures, and higher torque preservation. After SEM evaluation, damage was observed in the threads of the abutment screws, before and after loading in internal and external connections. Internal hexagon implants and predominantly internal conical (Morse taper) implants showed less microleakage in dynamic loading conditions. We suggest further studies to guarantee excellence in methodological quality. MDPI 2020-11-23 2020-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7700386/ /pubmed/33238476 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228685 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Vinhas, Ana Sofia
Aroso, Carlos
Salazar, Filomena
López-Jarana, Paula
Ríos-Santos, José Vicente
Herrero-Climent, Mariano
Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections
title Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections
title_full Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections
title_fullStr Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections
title_full_unstemmed Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections
title_short Review of the Mechanical Behavior of Different Implant–Abutment Connections
title_sort review of the mechanical behavior of different implant–abutment connections
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7700386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33238476
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228685
work_keys_str_mv AT vinhasanasofia reviewofthemechanicalbehaviorofdifferentimplantabutmentconnections
AT arosocarlos reviewofthemechanicalbehaviorofdifferentimplantabutmentconnections
AT salazarfilomena reviewofthemechanicalbehaviorofdifferentimplantabutmentconnections
AT lopezjaranapaula reviewofthemechanicalbehaviorofdifferentimplantabutmentconnections
AT riossantosjosevicente reviewofthemechanicalbehaviorofdifferentimplantabutmentconnections
AT herreroclimentmariano reviewofthemechanicalbehaviorofdifferentimplantabutmentconnections