Fracture resistance of different implant supported ceramic abutment/crown systems

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the fracture resistance and failure modes of different non-aged and aged abutment/crown systems. Materials and Methods One hundred dental implants (diameter 4.3 mm and length 11.5 mm) were restored with five abutment/crown systems: G1: a lithium disilicate hybrid abutment crown, G2: a lithium disilicate crown cemented on a lithium disilicate hybrid abutment, G3: a lithium disilicate crown cemented on a zirconia hybrid abutment, G4: a direct veneer porcelain layering on a zirconia hybrid abutment, and G5: a lithium disilicate crown cemented on a prefabricated all-zirconia abutment. Each group was divided into two groups (n=10) as control (non-aged) and thermomechanically aged. The fracture resistance test was performed. Failures during the aging process and after the fracture resistance test were examined. Results Both of the factors (restoration type and aging) affected the fracture resistance values and there was not an interaction between the factors (p>0.05). When fracture resistance values were compared regardless of aging, the highest values were observed in G3 and G4, respectively (p<0.05). When comparing the fracture resistance values, regardless of the restoration type, the aged group showed a significant lower fracture resistance value than control group (p<0.05). Conclusion A titanium base enhanced the fracture resistance of zirconia abutments. Thermomechanical aging decreased the fracture resistance of the tested ceramic abutment/crown systems. The major failure mode was the abutment fracture. 

Keywords

• Dental implant-abutment design,Yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystals ceramic

References

1. References 1. Gehrke P, Johannson D, Fischer C, Stawarczyk B, Beuer F. In vitro fatigue and fracture resistance of one-and two-piece CAD/ CAM zirconia implant abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015;30:546-54. [CrossRef]
2. 2. Elsayed A, Wille S, Al‐Akhali M, Kern M. Effect of fatigue loading on the fracture strength and failure mode of lithium disilicate and zirconia implant abutments. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29:20-7. [CrossRef]
3. 3. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Brånemark PI, Jemt T. A long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59.
4. 4. Truninger TC, Stawarczyk B, Leutert CR, Sailer TR, Hämmerle CH, Sailer I. Bending moments of zirconia and titanium abutments with internal and external implant-abutment connections after aging and chewing simulation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:12-8. [CrossRef]
5. 5. Sailer I, Philipp A, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, Hämmerle CH, Zwahlen M. A systematic review of the performance of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(suppl 4):4-31. [CrossRef]
6. 6. Chun HJ, Yeo IS, Lee JH, Kim SK, Heo SJ, Koak JY, Han JS, Lee SJ. Fracture strength study of internally connected zirconia abutments reinforced with titanium inserts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015;30:346-50. [CrossRef]
7. 7. Joo HS, Yang HS, Park SW, Kim HS, Yun KD, Ji MK, et al. Influence of preparation depths on the fracture load of customized zirconia abutments with titanium insert. J Adv Prosthodont 2015;7:183-90. [CrossRef]
8. 8. Alsahhaf A, Spies BC, Vach K, Kohal RJ. Fracture resistance of zirconia-based implant abutments after artificial long-term aging. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2017;66:224-32. [CrossRef]

9. 9. Elsayed A, Wille S, Al-Akhali M, Kern M. Comparison of fracture strength and failure mode of different ceramic implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:499-506. [CrossRef]
10. 10. Stimmelmayr M, Edelhoff D, Güth JF, Erdelt K, Happe A, Beuer F. Wear at the titanium-titanium and the titanium-zirconia implant-abutment interface: a comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2012;28:1215-20. [CrossRef]
11. 11. Foong JK, Judge RB, Palamara JE, Swain MV. Fracture resistance of titanium and zirconia abutments: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:304-12. [CrossRef]
12. 12. Stimmelmayr M, Sagerer S, Erdelt K, Beuer F. In vitro fatigue and fracture strength testing of one-piece zirconia implant abutments and zirconia implant abutments connected to titanium cores. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:488-93. [CrossRef]
13. 13. Bankoğlu Güngör M, Karakoca Nemli S, Çağlar A, Aydın C, Yılmaz H. Clinical study on the success of posterior monolithic zirconia crowns and fixed dental prostheses: preliminary report. Acta Odontol Turc 2017;34:104-8. [CrossRef]
14. 14. Bankoğlu Güngör M, Karakoca Nemli S. Fracture resistance of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramic and veneered zirconia molar crowns after aging in a mastication simulator. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:473-480. [CrossRef]
15. 15. Heffernan MJ, Aquilino SA, Diaz-Arnold AM, Haselton DR, Stanford CM, Vargas MA. Relative translucency of six all-ceramic systems. Part II: core and veneer materials. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:10-5. [CrossRef]
16. 16. Çavuşoglu Y, Akça K, Gürbüz R, Cehreli MC. A pilot study of joint stability at the zirconium or titanium abutment/titanium implant interface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:338-43. [CrossRef]
17. 17. Waltimo A, Könönen M. A novel bite force recorder and maximal isometric bite force values for healthy young adults. Scand J Dent Res 1993;101:171-5. [CrossRef]
18. 18. Waltimo A, Kemppainen P, Könönen M. Maximal contraction force and endurance of human jaw‐closing muscles in isometric clenching. Scand J Dent Res 1993;101:416-21. [CrossRef]
19. 19. Nishigawa K, Bando E, Nakano M. Quantitative study of bite force during sleep associated bruxism. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28:485-91. [CrossRef]
20. 20. Bankoğlu Güngör M, Yılmaz H, Turhan Bal B, Karakoca Nemli S, Sindel PT, Aydın C. Effect of thermal and mechanical aging on fracture toughness of Y-TZP core materials. Acta Odontol Turc 2014;31:1-6.
21. 21. Stimmelmayr M, Heiss P, Erdelt K, Schweiger J, Beuer F. Fracture resistance of different implant abutments supporting all-ceramic single crowns after aging. Int J Comput Dent 2017;20:53-64.
22. 22. Rosentritt M, Behr M, Gebhard R, Handel G. Influence of stress simulation parameters on the fracture strength of all-ceramic fixed-partial dentures. Dent Mater 2006;22:176-82. [CrossRef]
23. 23. Rosentritt M, Behr M, van der Zel JM, Feilzer AJ. Approach for valuating the influence of laboratory simulation. Dent Mater 2009;25:348-52. [CrossRef]
24. 24. Pittayachawan P, McDonald A, Petrie A, Knowles JC. The biaxial flexural strength and fatigue property of Lava™ Y-TZP dental ceramic. Dent Mater 2007;23:1018-29. [CrossRef]
25. 25. Kim JW, Covel N, Guess P, Rekow E, Zhang Y. Concerns of hydrothermal degradation in CAD/CAM zirconia. J Dent Res 2010;89:91-5. [CrossRef]
26. 26. Rosentritt M, Hagemann A, Hahnel S, Behr M, Preis V. In vitro performance of zirconia and titanium implant/abutment systems for anterior application. J Dent 2014;42:1019-26. [CrossRef]
27. 27. Park JI, Lee Y, Lee JH, Kim YL, Bae JM, Cho HW. Comparison of fracture resistance and fit accuracy of customized zirconia abutments with prefabricated zirconia abutments in internal hexagonal implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013;15:76978.
28. 28. Kelly JR, Rungruanganunt P. Fatigue behavior of computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture ceramic abutments as a function of design and ceramics processing. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2016;31:601-9. [CrossRef]