Cargando…
Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study
PURPOSE: To comparatively evaluate the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials with titanium implants after cyclic loading. METHODOLOGY: Two groups utilizing 20 titanium implants secured in resin blocks, in which 10 titanium implants are connected with titanium abutments (Group I...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7989763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33776348 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_294_19 |
_version_ | 1783668981493661696 |
---|---|
author | Ragupathi, Maniamuthu Mahadevan, Vallabh Azhagarasan, N. S. Ramakrishnan, Hariharan Jayakrishnakumar, S. |
author_facet | Ragupathi, Maniamuthu Mahadevan, Vallabh Azhagarasan, N. S. Ramakrishnan, Hariharan Jayakrishnakumar, S. |
author_sort | Ragupathi, Maniamuthu |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To comparatively evaluate the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials with titanium implants after cyclic loading. METHODOLOGY: Two groups utilizing 20 titanium implants secured in resin blocks, in which 10 titanium implants are connected with titanium abutments (Group I, n = 10) and the other 10 titanium implants are connected with Polyether ether Ketone (PEEK) abutments (Group II, n = 10). Abutments are cyclically loaded for 550,000 cycles. Surface profilometry, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDS) are carried out for all the abutment in both Group I and Group II before and after cyclic loading. The abutment surface at the implant-abutment interface is analyzed for wear. RESULTS: On comparison using independent “t”-test, it was found that the mean difference values of pre- and post-cyclic loading surface roughness (Ra value) of Group I (premachined titanium straight abutments) (−0.073 μm) was lower than the Group II test samples (premachined PEEK straight abutments) (−0.0004 μm), and this was found to be statistically insignificant (P = 0.272). SEM micrographs and EDS results also corroborate with the results of surface profilometry. CONCLUSION: The new concept in this study is Group II (PEEK abutments) are connected with titanium implants, to prove its compatibility and aesthetics. Within the limitations of the study, the surface roughness values before and after cyclic loading of two different abutment materials revealed that the wear resistance of titanium abutments is more than PEEK abutments, but the difference was found to be statistically insignificant. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7989763 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79897632021-03-26 Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study Ragupathi, Maniamuthu Mahadevan, Vallabh Azhagarasan, N. S. Ramakrishnan, Hariharan Jayakrishnakumar, S. Contemp Clin Dent Original Article PURPOSE: To comparatively evaluate the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials with titanium implants after cyclic loading. METHODOLOGY: Two groups utilizing 20 titanium implants secured in resin blocks, in which 10 titanium implants are connected with titanium abutments (Group I, n = 10) and the other 10 titanium implants are connected with Polyether ether Ketone (PEEK) abutments (Group II, n = 10). Abutments are cyclically loaded for 550,000 cycles. Surface profilometry, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDS) are carried out for all the abutment in both Group I and Group II before and after cyclic loading. The abutment surface at the implant-abutment interface is analyzed for wear. RESULTS: On comparison using independent “t”-test, it was found that the mean difference values of pre- and post-cyclic loading surface roughness (Ra value) of Group I (premachined titanium straight abutments) (−0.073 μm) was lower than the Group II test samples (premachined PEEK straight abutments) (−0.0004 μm), and this was found to be statistically insignificant (P = 0.272). SEM micrographs and EDS results also corroborate with the results of surface profilometry. CONCLUSION: The new concept in this study is Group II (PEEK abutments) are connected with titanium implants, to prove its compatibility and aesthetics. Within the limitations of the study, the surface roughness values before and after cyclic loading of two different abutment materials revealed that the wear resistance of titanium abutments is more than PEEK abutments, but the difference was found to be statistically insignificant. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020 2020-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7989763/ /pubmed/33776348 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_294_19 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Contemporary Clinical Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Ragupathi, Maniamuthu Mahadevan, Vallabh Azhagarasan, N. S. Ramakrishnan, Hariharan Jayakrishnakumar, S. Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study |
title | Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study |
title_full | Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study |
title_fullStr | Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study |
title_short | Comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – An in vitro study |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of the wear resistance of two different implant abutment materials after cyclic loading – an in vitro study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7989763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33776348 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_294_19 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ragupathimaniamuthu comparativeevaluationofthewearresistanceoftwodifferentimplantabutmentmaterialsaftercyclicloadinganinvitrostudy AT mahadevanvallabh comparativeevaluationofthewearresistanceoftwodifferentimplantabutmentmaterialsaftercyclicloadinganinvitrostudy AT azhagarasanns comparativeevaluationofthewearresistanceoftwodifferentimplantabutmentmaterialsaftercyclicloadinganinvitrostudy AT ramakrishnanhariharan comparativeevaluationofthewearresistanceoftwodifferentimplantabutmentmaterialsaftercyclicloadinganinvitrostudy AT jayakrishnakumars comparativeevaluationofthewearresistanceoftwodifferentimplantabutmentmaterialsaftercyclicloadinganinvitrostudy |