Effect of implant type on the stability of cantilever fixed dental prostheses: An in vitro study.
FDP
cantilever
chewing simulation
fracture load
implant
titanium
Journal
Clinical oral implants research
ISSN: 1600-0501
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Implants Res
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 9105713
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Feb 2024
08 Feb 2024
Historique:
revised:
30
11
2023
received:
08
08
2023
accepted:
11
01
2024
medline:
8
2
2024
pubmed:
8
2
2024
entrez:
8
2
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To simulate the replacement of a premolar with an implant-supported cantilever fixed dental prosthesis (ICFDP) and how the fracture load is affected by implant type, positioning within the zirconia blank, and aging protocol. Seventy-two ICFDPs were designed either within the enamel- or dentin layer of a 4Y-PSZ blank for bone-level and tissue-level titanium-zirconium implants. Fracture load was obtained on the cantilever at baseline (no aging) or after aging in a chewing simulator with the load applied within the implant axis (axial aging) or on the cantilever (12 groups with n = 6). A three-way ANOVA was applied (α = .05). A three-way ANOVA revealed a significant effect on fracture load values of implant type (p = .006) and aging (p < .001) but not for the position within the zirconia blank (p = .847). Fracture load values significantly increased from baseline bone level (608 ± 118 N) and tissue level (880 ± 293 N) when the implants were aged axially, with higher values for tissue level (1065 ± 182 N) than bone level (797 ± 113 N) (p < .001). However, when the force was applied to the cantilever, fracture load values decreased significantly for tissue-level (493 ± 70 N), while values for bone-level implants remained stable (690 ± 135 N). For ICFDPs, the use of bone-level implants is reasonable as catastrophic failures are likely to be restricted to the restoration, whereas with tissue-level implants, the transmucosal portion of the implant is susceptible to deformation, making repair more difficult.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Schweizerische Zahnärzte-Gesellschaft
ID : 317-20
Organisme : the Swiss Society of Reconstructive Dentistry (SSRD)
ID : 2020/2b
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Aglietta, M., Iorio Siciliano, V., Blasi, A., Sculean, A., Brägger, U., Lang, N. P., & Salvi, G. E. (2012). Clinical and radiographic changes at implants supporting single-unit crowns (SCs) and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with one cantilever extension. A retrospective study. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 23, 550-555.
Alzahrani, K. M. (2020). Implant bio-mechanics for successful implant therapy: A systematic review. Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry, 10, 700-714.
Burkhardt, F., Sailer, I., Fehmer, V., Mojon, P., & Pitta, J. (2022). Retention and marginal integrity of CAD/CAM fabricated crowns adhesively cemented to titanium base abutments - Influence of bonding system and restorative material. The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 36, 651. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.7576
de Souza Batista, V. E., Verri, F. R., Almeida, D. A. d. F., Santiago Junior, J. F., Lemos, C. A. A., & Pellizzer, E. P. (2017). Finite element analysis of implant-supported prosthesis with pontic and cantilever in the posterior maxilla. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 20, 663-670.
Gallucci, G. O., Avrampou, M., Taylor, J. C., Elpers, J., Thalji, G., & Cooper, L. F. (2016). Maxillary implant-supported fixed prosthesis: A survey of reviews and key variables for treatment planning. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 31(Suppl), s192-s197.
Horsch, L., Kronsteiner, D., & Rammelsberg, P. (2022). Survival and complications of implant-supported cantilever fixed dental prostheses with zirconia and metal frameworks: A retrospective cohort study. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 24, 621-629.
Institute Straumann SA. (2014). Material Information. Retrieved May 2, 2023 . Available from: https://www.straumann.com/content/dam/media-center/straumann/en/documents/brochure/technical-information/490.019-en_low.pdf
Kadkhodazadeh, M., Amid, R., Moscowchi, A., & Lakmazaheri, E. (2023). Short-term and long-term success and survival rates of implants supporting single-unit and multiunit fixed prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.12.012
Kohal, R.-J., Finke, H. C., & Klaus, G. (2009). Stability of prototype two-piece zirconia and titanium implants after artificial aging: An in vitro pilot study. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 11, 323-329.
Kohal, R.-J., Kilian, J., Stampf, S., & Spies, B. (2015). All-ceramic single crown restauration of zirconia oral implants and its influence on fracture resistance: An investigation in the artificial mouth. Materials, 8, 1577-1589.
Lago, L., da Silva, L., Fernández-Formoso, N., & Rilo, B. (2023). Systematic assessment of soft tissue level and bone level dental implants. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medicine, and Pathology, 35, 375-382.
Novais, M., Silva, A. S., Mendes, J., Barreiros, P., Aroso, C., & Mendes, J. M. (2022). Fracture resistance of CAD/CAM implant-supported 3Y-TZP-zirconia cantilevers: An in vitro study. Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 15, 6638.
Øilo, M., & Arola, D. (2018). Fractographic analyses of failed one-piece zirconia implant restorations. Dental Materials, 34, 922-931.
Roccuzzo, A., Fanti, R., Mancini, L., Imber, J.-C., Stähli, A., Molinero-Mourelle, P., Schimmel, M., Sculean, A., & Salvi, G. E. (2023). Implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions: State of the art and future perspectives. International Journal of Oral Implantology (Berlin, Germany), 16, 13-28.
Rohr, N., Nüesch, R., Greune, R., Mainetti, G., Karlin, S., Zaugg, L. K., & Zitzmann, N. U. (2022). Stability of cantilever fixed dental prostheses on zirconia implants. Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 15, 3633.
Spies, B. C., Zhang, F., Wesemann, C., Li, M., & Rosentritt, M. (2020). Reliability and aging behavior of three different zirconia grades used for monolithic four-unit fixed dental prostheses. Dental Materials, 36, e329-e339.
Tajti, P., Solyom, E., Czumbel, L. M., Szabó, B., Fazekas, R., Németh, O., Hermann, P., Gerber, G., Hegyi, P., & Mikulás, K. (2023). Monolithic zirconia as a valid alternative to metal-ceramic for implant-supported single crowns in the posterior region: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.05.006
Thoma, D. S., Wolleb, K., Schellenberg, R., Strauss, F.-J., Hämmerle, C. H. F., & Jung, R. E. (2021). Two short implants versus one short implant with a cantilever: 5-year results of a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 48, 1480-1490.
von Stein-Lausnitz, M., Nickenig, H.-J., Wolfart, S., Neumann, K., von Stein-Lausnitz, A., Spies, B. C., & Beuer, F. (2019). Survival rates and complication behaviour of tooth implant-supported, fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry, 88, 103167.
Zhang, Y., & Lawn, B. R. (2018). Novel zirconia materials in dentistry. Journal of Dental Research, 97, 140-147.