» Articles » PMID: 36431619

Influence of the Peek Abutments on Mechanical Behavior of the Internal Connections Single Implant

Abstract

The present study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of PEEK abutments with different heights on single titanium implants. To investigate the implant surface, different tests (scanning electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray, and X-ray diffraction) were adopted. Herein, 20 implants received the 4.5 × 4.0 mm PEEK short abutment (SA) and 20 received the 4.5 × 5.5 mm PEEK long abutment (LA). The abutments were installed using dual-cure resin cement. To determine the fatigue test, two specimens from each group were submitted to the single load fracture test. For this, the samples were submitted to a compressive load of (0.5 mm/min; 30°) in a universal testing machine. For the fatigue test, the samples received 2,000,000 cycles (2 Hz; 30°). The number of cycles and the load test was analyzed by the reliability software SPSS statistics using Kaplan-Meier and Mantel-Cox tests (log-rank) (p < 0.05). The maximum load showed no statistically significant differences (p = 0.189) for the SA group (64.1 kgf) and the LA group (56.5 kgf). The study groups were statistically different regarding the number of cycles (p = 0.022) and fracture strength (p = 0.001). PEEK abutments can be indicated with caution for implant-supported rehabilitation and may be suitable as temporary rehabilitation.

Citing Articles

Effect of Antirotational Two-Piece Titanium Base on the Vertical Misfit, Fatigue Behavior, Stress Concentration, and Fracture Load of Implant-Supported Zirconia Crowns.

Adolfi D, Grangeiro M, Ausiello P, Bottino M, Tribst J Materials (Basel). 2023; 16(13).

PMID: 37445162 PMC: 10343835. DOI: 10.3390/ma16134848.

References
1.
Larrucea Verdugo C, Jaramillo Nunez G, Acevedo Avila A, Larrucea San Martin C . Microleakage of the prosthetic abutment/implant interface with internal and external connection: in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 25(9):1078-83. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12217. View

2.
Park J, Baek C, Heo S, Kim S, Koak J, Kim S . An In Vitro Evaluation of the Loosening of Different Interchangeable Abutments in Internal-Connection-Type Implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017; 32(2):350-355. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.5295. View

3.
Souza A, Xavier T, Platt J, Borges A . Effect of Base and Inlay Restorative Material on the Stress Distribution and Fracture Resistance of Weakened Premolars. Oper Dent. 2015; 40(4):E158-66. DOI: 10.2341/14-229-L. View

4.
Peng T, Shih Y, Hsia S, Wang T, Li P, Lin D . In Vitro Assessment of the Cell Metabolic Activity, Cytotoxicity, Cell Attachment, and Inflammatory Reaction of Human Oral Fibroblasts on Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Implant-Abutment. Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13(17). PMC: 8433877. DOI: 10.3390/polym13172995. View

5.
Tribst J, Rodrigues V, Dal Piva A, Borges A, Nishioka R . The importance of correct implants positioning and masticatory load direction on a fixed prosthesis. J Clin Exp Dent. 2018; 10(1):e81-e87. PMC: 5899813. DOI: 10.4317/jced.54489. View