Premium
Fracture Resistance and Mode of Failure of Ceramic versus Titanium Implant Abutments and Single Implant‐Supported Restorations
Author(s) -
Sghaireen Mohd G.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/cid.12160
Subject(s) - abutment , materials science , crown (dentistry) , titanium , implant , dentistry , cubic zirconia , fracture (geology) , ceramic , dental abutments , orthodontics , composite material , medicine , metallurgy , surgery , structural engineering , engineering
Background The material of choice for implant‐supported restorations is affected by esthetic requirements and type of abutment. Purpose This study compares the fracture resistance of different types of implant abutments and implant‐supported restorations and their mode of failure. Materials and Methods Forty‐five O raltronics Pitt‐Easy implants ( O raltronics D ental I mplant T echnology GmbH , B remen, G ermany) (4 mm diameter, 10 mm length) were embedded in clear autopolymerizing acrylic resin. The implants were randomly divided into three groups, A , B and C , of 15 implants each. In group A , titanium abutments and metal‐ceramic crowns were used. In group B , zirconia ceramic abutments and I n‐ C eram A lumina crowns were used. In group C , zirconia ceramic abutments and IPS E mpress E sthetic crowns were used. Specimens were tested to failure by applying load at 130° from horizontal plane using an I nstron U niversal T esting M achine. Subsequently, the mode of failure of each specimen was identified. Results Fracture resistance was significantly different between groups ( p < .05). The highest fracture loads were associated with metal‐ceramic crowns supported by titanium abutments ( p = .000). IPS E mpress crowns supported by zirconia abutments had the lowest fracture loads ( p = .000). Fracture modes of metal‐ceramic crowns supported by titanium abutments included screw fracture and screw bending. Fracture of both crown and abutment was the dominant mode of failure of I n‐ C eram/ IPS E mpress crowns supported by zirconia abutments. Conclusions Metal‐ceramic crowns supported by titanium abutments were more resistant to fracture than I n‐ C eram crowns supported by zirconia abutments, which in turn were more resistant to fracture than IPS E mpress crowns supported by zirconia abutments. In addition, failure modes of restorations supported by zirconia abutments were more catastrophic than those for restorations supported by titanium abutments.