The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Detorque values of abutment screws in a multiple implant-supported prosthesis

다수 임플란트 지지 보철물에서 지대주 나사의 풀림 토크값에 대한 연구

  • Lee, Ju-Ri (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul St. Mary's Dental Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Lee, Dong-Hwan (Department of Prosthodontics, The Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Hwang, Jae-Woong (Department of Prosthodontics, The Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Jung-Han (Department of Prosthodontics, The Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
  • 이주리 (가톨릭대학교 서울성모치과병원 보철과) ;
  • 이동환 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 치과진료부 보철과) ;
  • 황재웅 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 치과진료부 보철과) ;
  • 최정한 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 치과진료부 보철과)
  • Received : 2010.09.25
  • Accepted : 2010.10.14
  • Published : 2010.10.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the detorque values of screws in a multiple implant-supported superstructure using stone casts made with 2 different impression techniques. Material and methods: A fully edentulous mandibular master model and a metal framework directly connected to four implants (Br${\aa}$nemark $System^{(R)}$; Nobel Biocare AB) with a passive fit to each other were fabricated. Six experimental stone casts (Group 1) were made with 6 non-splinted impressions on a master cast and another 6 experimental casts (Group 2) were made with 6 acrylic resin splinted impressions. The detorque values of screws ($TorqTite^{(R)}$ GoldAdapt Abutment Screw; Nobel Biocare AB) were measured twice after the metal framework was fastened onto each experimental stone cast with 20 Ncm torque. Detorque values were analyzed using the mixed model with the fixed effect of screw and reading and the random effect of model for the repeated measured data at a .05 level of ignificance. Results: The mean detorque values were 7.9 Ncm (Group 1) and 8.1 Ncm (Group 2), and the mean of minimum detorque values were 6.1 Ncm (Group 1) and 6.5 Ncm (Group 2). No statistically significant differences between 2 groups were found and no statistically significant differences among 4 screws were found for detorque values. No statistically significant differences between 2 groups were also found for minimum detorque values. Conclusion: In a multiple external hexagon implant-supported prosthesis, no significant differences between 2 groups were found for detorque values and for minimum detorque values. There seems to be no significant differences in screw joint stability between 2 stone cast groups made with 2 different impression techniques.

연구 목적: 본 연구는 다수의 임플란트에 의해 지지되는 보철물을, 두 가지 인상법에 의해 얻은 모형들에 연결한 후, 나사의 풀림 토크값을 측정하여 나사 결합부 안정성에 차이가 있는지를 알아보는데 그 목적이 있다. 연구 재료 및 방법: 네 개의 외부 육각 임플란트 (Br${\aa}$nemark $System^{(R)}$; Nobel Biocare AB)에 직접 연결되는 임플란트 상부 구조물과, 이와 수동적 적합을 갖는 완전 무치악 하악주모형을 만들었다. 이 주모형에서 비연결 인상법으로 6회 인상을 채득하여 6개의 모형 (1군)을 제작하고, 아크릴릭 레진을 이용한 연결 인상법으로 6회 인상을 채득하여 6개의 모형 (2군)을 제작하여, 총 12개의 실험모형을 제작하였다. 각 실험모형에 상부 구조물을 지대주 나사 ($TorqTite^{(R)}$ GoldAdapt Abutment Screw; Nobel Biocare AB)로 20 Ncm의 힘으로 조인 후 각 나사의 풀림 토크값을 총 2회 측정하였다. 두 군 간 나사의 풀림 토크값의 비교를 위한 통계분석은 반복측정을 고려하고 나사와 reading을 고정효과로, 모형을 랜덤효과로 포함하는 혼합모형 (mixed model)을 이용하여 유의수준 .05에서 실시하였다. 결과: 나사의 풀림 토크값의 평균은 7.9 Ncm (1군)과 8.1 Ncm (2군)이었으며, 4개 나사의 풀림 토크값 중 최소값인 최소 풀림 토크값의 평균은 6.1 Ncm (1군)과 6.5 Ncm (2군)이었다. 나사의 풀림 토크값은 두 군 간에 통계적으로 유의할 만한 차이가 없었고, 조인 순서와 위치가 서로 다른 4개의 나사 간의 풀림 토크값도 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 없었다. 최소 풀림 토크값도 두 군 간에 통계적으로 유의할 만한 차이가 없었다. 결론: 다수의 외부 육각 임플란트에 의해 지지되는 보철물에서, 나사의 풀림 토크값과 최소 풀림 토크값은 비연결 인상법과 연결 인상법에 의해 얻어진 모형 간에 차이가 없어, 나사 결합부 안정성에 차이가 없는 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Worthington P, Bolender CL, Taylor TD. The Swedish system of osseointegrated implants: problems and complications encountered during a 4-year trial period. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:77-84.
  2. Sones AD. Complications with osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:581-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90084-X
  3. Patterson EA. Passive fit: Meaning, significance and assessment in relation to implant-supported prostheses. In: Naert EI. passive fit of implant- supported superstructures: Friction or reality? proceedings of an international symposium. Leuven: Leuven University Press; 1995, p. 17-28.
  4. Sekine H, Komiyama Y, Potta H , Yoshida K. Mobility characteristics and tactile sensitivity of osseointegrated fixture-supporting systems. In: van Steenberghe D, Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Henry PJ, Holt R, Liden G. Tissue integration in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica; 1986, p. 326-32.
  5. Vigolo P, Fonzi F, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:470-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.08.015
  6. Naconecy MM, Teixeira ER, Shinkai RS, Frasca LC, Cervieri A. Evaluation of the accuracy of 3 transfer techniques for implant-supported prostheses with multiple abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:192-8.
  7. Sellers GC. Direct assembly framework for osseointegrated implant prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:662-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90587-8
  8. Jemt T, Laney WR, Harris D, Henry PJ, Krogh PH Jr, Polizzi G, Zarb GA, Herrmann I. Osseointegrated implants for single tooth replacement: a 1-year report from a multicenter prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:29-36.
  9. Becker W, Becker BE. Replacement of maxillary and mandibular molars with single endosseous implant restorations: a retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:51-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80229-X
  10. Kreissl ME, Gerds T, Muche R, Heydecke G, Strub JR. Technical complications of implant-supported fixed partial dentures in partially edentulous cases after an average observation period of 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:720-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01414.x
  11. Brager U, Aeschlimann S, Bu¨rgin W, Ha¨mmerle CH, Lang NP. Biological and technical complications and failures with fixed partial dentures (FPD) on implants and teeth after four to five years of function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:26-34. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012001026.x
  12. Choi JH, Kim CW, Lim YJ, Kim MJ, Lee SH. The effect of screw tightening sequence and tightening method on the detorque value in implant-supported superstructure. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2007;45:653-64.
  13. Tautin FS. Impression making for osseointegrated dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:250-1. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90299-9
  14. Henry PJ. An alternative method for the production of accurate casts and occlusal records in osseointegrated implant rehabilitation. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:694-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(87)90421-5
  15. Wee AG. Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83:323-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(00)70136-3
  16. Assif D, Marshak B, Schmidt A. Accuracy of implant impression techniques. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:216-22.
  17. Haack JE, Sakaguchi RL, Sun T, Coffey JP. Elongation and preload stress in dental implant abutment screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:529-36.
  18. Martin WC, Woody RD, Miller BH, Miller AW. Implant abutment screw rotations and preloads for four different screw materials and surfaces. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:24-32. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.116230
  19. Cibirka RM, Nelson SK, Lang BR, Rueggeberg FA. Examination of the implant-abutment interface after fatigue testing. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:268-75. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.114266
  20. Goldfogel M, Harvey WL, Winter D. Dimensional change of acrylic resin tray materials. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:284-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90306-3
  21. Davis GB, Moser JB, Brinsden GI. The bonding properties of elastomer tray adhesives. J Prosthet Dent 1976;36:278-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(76)90183-9
  22. Revised American Dental Association Specification no. 19 for Nonaqueous, Elastomeric Dental Impression Materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1977;94:733-41. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1977.0334
  23. Assif D, Fenton A, Zarb G, Schmitt A. Comparative accuracy of implant impression procedures. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1992;12:112-21.
  24. Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Bra􀆆nemark implants in edentulous jaws: a study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:270-6.
  25. Carr AB. Comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:448-55.
  26. Barrett MG, de Rijk WG, Burgess JO. The accuracy of six impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthodont 1993;2:75-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1993.tb00387.x
  27. Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part III: Problems and complications encountered. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:185-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90177-E
  28. Byrne D, Houston F, Cleary R, Claffey N. The fit of cast and premachined implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:184-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70108-8
  29. Carr AB. Comparison of impression techniques for a two-implant 15-degree divergent model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7: 468-75.
  30. Bartlett DW, Greenwood R, Howe L. The suitability of head-ofimplant and conventional abutment impression techniques for implant- retained three unit bridges: an in vitro study. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2002;10:163-6.
  31. Binon PP. The effect of implant/abutment hexagonal misfit on screw joint stability. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:149-60.
  32. Pietrabissa R, Gionso L, Quaglini V, Di Martino E, Simion M. An in vitro study on compensation of mismatch of screw versus cement- retained implant supported fixed prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:448-57. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011005448.x
  33. Rhyu SM, Cho IH, Lim HS, Lim JH. A comparative study on the accuracy of master casts by implant impression techniques. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2002;40:18-29.
  34. Hsu CC, Millstein PL, Stein RS. A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant transfer techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1993;69:588-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90287-X
  35. Nissan J, Gross M, Shifman A, Assif D. Stress levels for well-fitting implant superstructures as a function of tightening force levels, tightening sequence, and different operators. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:20-3. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.115182
  36. Watanabe F, Uno I, Hata Y, Neuendorff G, Kirsch A. Analysis of stress distribution in a screw-retained implant prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:209-18.
  37. Kim JM, Han JS, Lee SH, Yang JH, Lee JB, Kim YS. A study of screw loosening after dynamic continous fatigue test of several abutment screw. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2003;41:519-31
  38. Merz BR, Hunenbart S, Belser UC. Mechanics of the implant-abutment connection: an 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:519-26.

Cited by

  1. A comparative study on the fit and screw joint stability of ready-made abutment and CAD-CAM custom-made abutment vol.51, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2013.51.4.276
  2. Fit analysis of CAD-CAM custom abutment using micro-CT vol.54, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2016.54.4.370