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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ragupathi, Maniamuthu, Mahadevan, Vallabh, Azhagarasan, N. S., Ramakrishnan, Hariharan, Jayakrishnakumar, S.
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