Premium
Fracture load of tooth–implant‐retained zirconia ceramic fixed dental prostheses: effect of span length and preparation design
Author(s) -
Gabbert Olaf,
Karatzogiannis Efstathios,
Ohlmann Brigitte,
Schmitter Marc,
Karl Jochen,
Rammelsberg Peter
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02191.x
Subject(s) - abutment , materials science , premolar , inlay , crown (dentistry) , fracture (geology) , cubic zirconia , dentistry , molar , implant , tooth fracture , dental abutments , dental prosthesis , ceramic , orthodontics , composite material , structural engineering , medicine , surgery , engineering
Objectives: Evaluation of the effect of different span length and preparation designs on the fracture load of tooth–implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (TIFDPs) manufactured from yttrium‐stabilized zirconia frameworks. Material and methods: Forty‐eight TIFDPs were manufactured using a CAD/CAM system and veneered with a press ceramic. Rigidly mounted implants (SLA, diameter 4.1 mm, length 10 mm) in the molar region with a titanium abutment were embedded in PMMA bases pairwise with premolars. All premolars were covered with heat‐shrink tubing to simulate physiological tooth mobility. Six different test groups were prepared (a) differing in the preparation design of the premolar (inlay [i]; crown [c]), (b) the material of the premolar (metal [m]; natural human [h]) and (c) the length of the TIFDPs (3‐unit [3]; 4‐unit [4]). All TIFDPs underwent thermomechanical loading (TCML) (10,000 × 6.5°/60°; 6 × 10 5 × 50 N). The load to fracture (N) was measured and fracture sites were evaluated macroscopically. Results: None of the restorations failed during TCML. The mean fracture loads (standard deviations) were 1,522 N (249) for the 3‐unit, inlay‐retained TIFDPs on a metal abutment tooth (3‐im), 1,910 N (165) for the 3‐cm group, 1,049 N (183) for group 4‐im, 1,274 N (282) for group 4‐cm, 1,229 N (174) for group 4‐ih and 911 N (205) for group 4‐ch. Initial damages within the veneering ceramic occurred before the final failure of the restoration. The corresponding loads were 24–52% lower than the fracture load values. Conclusions: All restorations tested could withstand the mastication forces expected. Fracture‐load values for 3‐ and 4‐unit inlay–crown and crown–crown‐retained TIFDPs should spur further clinical investigation.