The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Comparative study on stress distribution around internal tapered connection implants according to fit of cement- and screw-retained prostheses

  • Lee, Mi-Young (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Heo, Seong-Joo (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Park, Eun-Jin (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Park, Ji-Man (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
  • Received : 2013.04.19
  • Accepted : 2013.08.16
  • Published : 2013.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to compare the passivity of implant superstructures by assessing the strain development around the internal tapered connection implants with strain gauges. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A polyurethane resin block in which two implants were embedded served as a measurement model. Two groups of implant restorations utilized cement-retained design and internal surface of the first group was adjusted until premature contact between the restoration and the abutment completely disappeared. In the second group, only nodules detectable to the naked eye were removed. The third group employed screw-retained design and specimens were generated by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing system (n=10). Four strain gauges were fixed on the measurement model mesially and distally to the implants. The strains developed in each strain gauge were recorded during fixation of specimens. To compare the difference among groups, repeated measures 2-factor analysis was performed at a level of significance of ${\alpha}$=.05. RESULTS. The absolute strain values were measured to analyze the magnitude of strain. The mean absolute strain value ranged from 29.53 to 412.94 ${\mu}m/m$ at the different strain gauge locations. According to the result of overall comparison, the cement-retained prosthesis groups exhibited significant difference. No significant difference was detected between milled screw-retained prostheses group and cement-retained prosthesis groups. CONCLUSION. Within the limitations of the study, it was concluded that the cement-retained designs do not always exhibit lower levels of stress than screw-retained designs. The internal adjustment of a cement-retained implant restoration is essential to achieve passive fit.

Keywords

References

  1. Rudd KD, O'Leary TJ, Stumf AJ. Horizontal tooth mobility in carefully screened subjects. Periodontology 1964;4:65-70.
  2. 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 editors. Tissue integration in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica; 1986. p. 326-9.
  3. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  4. Lundqvist S, Carlsson GE. Maxillary fixed prostheses on osseointegrated dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:262-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90028-8
  5. Lekholm U, Adell R, Branemark P-I. Complications. In: Branemark P-I, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Tissue- Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago; Quintessence; 1985. p. 233-40.
  6. Rangert B, Jemt T, Jorneus L. Forces and moments on Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4: 241-7.
  7. Spector MR, Donovan TE, Nicholls JI. An evaluation of impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:444-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90235-5
  8. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:719-28.
  9. Taylor TD. Prosthodontic problems and limitations associated with osseointegration. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:74-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70197-0
  10. Goodacre CJ, Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K. Clinical complications of osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81: 537-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70208-8
  11. Kallus T, Bessing C. Loose gold screws frequently occur in full-arch fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants after 5 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9: 169-78.
  12. Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Branemark 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.
  13. Naert I, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, Darius P. A study of 589 consecutive implants supporting complete fixed prostheses. Part II: Prosthetic aspects. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68: 949-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90557-Q
  14. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Branemark PI, Jemt T. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59.
  15. Jemt T, Book K. Prosthesis misfit and marginal bone loss in edentulous implant patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:620-5.
  16. Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, van Roekel N. Bending overload and implant fracture: a retrospective clinical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:326-34.
  17. Tan KB. The clinical significance of distortion in implant prosthodontics: is there such a thing as passive fit? Ann Acad Med Singapore 1995;24:138-57.
  18. Heckmann SM, Karl M, Wichmann MG, Winter W, Graef F, Taylor TD. Cement fixation and screw retention: parameters of passive fit. An in vitro study of three-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15:466-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01027.x
  19. Karl M, Winter W, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM. In vitro study on passive fit in implant-supported 5-unit fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:30-7.
  20. Taylor TD, Agar JR, Vogiatzi T. Implant prosthodontics: current perspective and future directions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:66-75.
  21. Chiche GJ, Pinault A. Considerations for fabrication of implant- supported posterior restorations. Int J Prosthodont 1991;4:37-44.
  22. 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
  23. Guichet DL, Caputo AA, Choi H, Sorensen JA. Passivity of fit and marginal opening in screw- or cement-retained implant fixed partial denture designs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:239-46.
  24. Guichet DL. Load transfer in screw- and cement-retained implant fixed partial denture designs [abstract]. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:631.
  25. Misch CE. Screw-retained versus cement-retained implantsupported prostheses. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1995; 7:15-8.
  26. Kim WD, Jacobson Z, Nathanson D. In vitro stress analyses of dental implants supporting screw-retained and cement-retained prostheses. Implant Dent 1999;8:141-51. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199908020-00006
  27. Williams WN, La Pointe LL, Blanton RS. Human discrimination of different bite forces. J Oral Rehabil 1984;11:407-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1984.tb00593.x
  28. Kikuchi M, Korioth TW, Hannam AG. The association among occlusal contacts, clenching effort, and bite force distribution in man. J Dent Res 1997;76:1316-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345970760061201
  29. 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.
  30. Iplikcioglu H, Akca K, Cehreli MC, Sahin S. Comparison of non-linear finite element stress analysis with in vitro strain gauge measurements on a Morse taper implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:258-65.
  31. Karl M, Rosch S, Graef F, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM. Static implant loading caused by as-cast metal and ceramic-ve-neered superstructures. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93:324-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.12.006
  32. Karl M, Wichmann MG, Winter W, Graef F, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM. Influence of fixation mode and superstructure span upon strain development of implant fixed partial dentures. J Prosthodont 2008;17:3-8.
  33. Karl M, Wichmann MG, Heckmann SM, Krafft T. Strain development in 3-unit implant-supported CAD/CAM restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:648-52.
  34. Stafford GD, Glantz PO. Intraoral strain gauge measurements on complete dentures: a methodological study. J Dent 1991;19:80-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(91)90094-F
  35. Bernal G, Okamura M, Munoz CA. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont 2003;12:111-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1059-941X(03)00006-8
  36. Clelland NL, Papazoglou E, Carr AB, Gilat A. Comparison of strains transferred to a bone simulant among implant overdenture bars with various levels of misfit. J Prosthodont 1995;4:243-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1995.tb00350.x
  37. Clelland NL, Carr AB, Gilat A. Comparison of strains transferred to a bone simulant between as-cast and postsoldered implant frameworks for a five-implant-supported fixed prosthesis. J Prosthodont 1996;5:193-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1996.tb00296.x
  38. Clelland NL, van Putten MC. Comparison of strains produced in a bone simulant between conventional cast and resin- luted implant frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:793-9.
  39. Pietrabissa R, Contro R, Quaglini V, Soncini M, Gionso L, Simion M. Experimental and computational approach for the evaluation of the biomechanical effects of dental bridge misfit. J Biomech 2000;33:1489-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00089-0
  40. Nishioka RS, Nishioka LN, Abreu CW, de Vasconcellos LG, Balducci I. Machined and plastic copings in three-element prostheses with different types of implant-abutment joints: a strain gauge comparative analysis. J Appl Oral Sci 2010;18: 225-30. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572010000300005
  41. Schwarz MS. Mechanical complications of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:156-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011S1156.x
  42. Jemt T, Book K. Prosthesis misfit and marginal bone loss in edentulous implant patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:620-5.
  43. Carr AB, Gerard DA, Larsen PE. The response of bone in primates around unloaded dental implants supporting prostheses with different levels of fit. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76: 500-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90008-6
  44. Eser A, Akca K, Eckert S, Cehreli MC. Nonlinear finite element analysis versus ex vivo strain gauge measurements on immediately loaded implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:439-46.

Cited by

  1. Passivity of Conventional and CAD/CAM Fabricated Implant Frameworks vol.26, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201300145
  2. Development of a Sealing-Type Abutment for Implant and the Performance Evaluation via Structural Analysis vol.33, pp.9, 2016, https://doi.org/10.7736/KSPE.2016.33.9.769
  3. Current Options of Making Implant Supported Prosthetic Restorations to Mitigate the Impact of Occlusal Forces vol.376, pp.1662-9507, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/DDF.376.66
  4. Optimization of the Groove Depth of a Sealing-type Abutment for Implant Using a Genetic Algorithm vol.17, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14775/ksmpe.2018.17.6.024
  5. Comparative in vitro study of cementing techniques for implant-supported restorations vol.116, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.014