An In Vitro Investigation of the Role of Implant Abutment Materials on the Fracture Resistance and Failure Mode of Implant-Supported Restorations

Overview

Journal Cureus

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2024 Mar 26

PMID 38529462

Authors

Vishnu Teja Obulareddy

Arti Dixit

Violeta Takhellambam

Rajnish K Verma

Deepyanti

Sandeep Kumar

Amit Kumar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Implant-supported restorations have gained popularity in modern dentistry, and the choice of abutment material is crucial for their long-term success. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance and failure mode of implant-supported restorations using different abutment materials.

Methods: Ninety standardized implant-supported restorations were included in the study. Abutments made of titanium, zirconia, and a hybrid material (titanium base with a zirconia veneer) were evaluated. Standardized abutments were fabricated, and screw-retained restorations were fabricated using a resin-based composite material. Cyclic loading was applied using a universal testing machine to simulate masticatory forces. Fracture resistance was measured in terms of the number of cycles to failure (NCF), and failure modes were analyzed.

Results: The findings indicate that zirconia abutments exhibited higher fracture resistance compared to titanium and hybrid abutments. Longer implants demonstrated higher fracture resistance, suggesting improved stability and resistance to mechanical forces. Increased loading angles resulted in decreased fracture resistance of implant-supported restorations, emphasizing the need for proper occlusal adjustment. Central loading showed higher fracture resistance than lateral and posterior loading locations. The distribution of failure modes varied among the abutment materials, with bulk prosthesis fracture being the most common in the titanium group, while abutment fracture was predominant in the zirconia and hybrid groups.

Conclusion: This in vitro study demonstrated that the choice of abutment material significantly influenced the fracture resistance and failure mode of implant-supported restorations. Zirconia abutments exhibited the highest fracture resistance, followed by hybrid and titanium abutments. The failure mode analysis revealed different patterns of failure for each abutment material.

References

Pjetursson B, Zarauz C, Strasding M, Sailer I, Zwahlen M, Zembic A . A systematic review of the influence of the implant-abutment connection on the clinical outcomes of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29 Suppl 18:160-183. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13362. View

Pesce P, Fabbro M, Modenese L, Sandron S, Francetti L, Isola G . Influence of implant diameter on implant survival rate and clinical outcomes in the posterior area: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):235. PMC: 10122303. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-02962-8. View

Giner S, Bartolome J, Gomez-Cogolludo P, Castellote C, Pradies G . Fatigue fracture resistance of titanium and chairside CAD-CAM zirconia implant abutments supporting zirconia crowns: An in vitro comparative and finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 125(3):503.e1-503.e9. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.025. View

Lee H, Jo M, Noh G . Biomechanical effects of dental implant diameter, connection type, and bone density on microgap formation and fatigue failure: A finite element analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020; 200:105863. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2020.105863. View

Holmgren E, Seckinger R, Kilgren L, Mante F . Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis--a two-dimensional comparative study examining the effects of implant diameter, implant shape, and load direction. J Oral Implantol. 1998; 24(2):80-8. DOI: 10.1563/1548-1336(1998)024<0080:EPOODI>2.3.CO;2. View

Morton D, Gallucci G, Lin W, Pjetursson B, Polido W, Roehling S . Group 2 ITI Consensus Report: Prosthodontics and implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29 Suppl 16:215-223. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13298. View

Shabanpour R, Mousavi N, Ghodsi S, Alikhasi M . Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance and Mode of Failure of Zirconia and Titanium Abutments with Different Diameters. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2015; 16(8):613-8. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1730. View

Foong J, Judge R, Palamara J, Swain M . Fracture resistance of titanium and zirconia abutments: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 109(5):304-12. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60306-6. View

Tak S, Jeong Y, Kim J, Kim J, Lee H . A comprehensive study on the mechanical effects of implant-supported prostheses under multi-directional loading and different occlusal contact points. BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):338. PMC: 10227958. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03016-9. View

10.

Hosseini-Faradonbeh S, Katoozian H . Biomechanical evaluations of the long-term stability of dental implant using finite element modeling method: a systematic review. J Adv Prosthodont. 2022; 14(3):182-202. PMC: 9259347. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2022.14.3.182. View

11.

Kotsovilis S, Fourmousis I, Karoussis I, Bamia C . A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of implant length on the survival of rough-surface dental implants. J Periodontol. 2009; 80(11):1700-18. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2009.090107. View

12.

Sun F, Lv L, Cheng W, Zhang J, Ba D, Song G . Effect of Loading Angles and Implant Lengths on the Static and Fatigue Fractures of Dental Implants. Materials (Basel). 2021; 14(19). PMC: 8509834. DOI: 10.3390/ma14195542. View

13.

Kapoor S, Rodrigues S, Mahesh M, Shetty T, Pai U, Saldanha S . Evaluation of Stress Generated with Different Abutment Materials and Angulations under Axial and Oblique Loading in the Anterior Maxilla: Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis. Int J Dent. 2021; 2021:9205930. PMC: 8654540. DOI: 10.1155/2021/9205930. View

14.

Tak S, Noh G, Jeong Y, Lee H . Automated vector analysis to design implant-supported prostheses: A dental technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 129(2):257-261. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.05.017. View

15.

Sugiura T, Yamamoto K, Horita S, Murakami K, Tsutsumi S, Kirita T . Effects of implant tilting and the loading direction on the displacement and micromotion of immediately loaded implants: an experiment and finite element analysis. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2017; 47(4):251-262. PMC: 5577443. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2017.47.4.251. View

16.

Thulasidas S, Givan D, Lemons J, ONeal S, Ramp L, Liu P . Influence of implant angulation on the fracture resistance of zirconia abutments. J Prosthodont. 2014; 24(2):127-35. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12182. View

17.

Javed F, Romanos G . The role of primary stability for successful immediate loading of dental implants. A literature review. J Dent. 2010; 38(8):612-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.05.013. View

18.

Honda J, Komine F, Kamio S, Taguchi K, Blatz M, Matsumura H . Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw-retained zirconia-based molar restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 28(9):1119-1126. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12926. View

19.

Camps-Font O, Gonzalez-Barnadas A, Mir-Mari J, Figueiredo R, Gay-Escoda C, Valmaseda-Castellon E . Fracture resistance after implantoplasty in three implant-abutment connection designs. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2020; 25(5):e691-e699. PMC: 7473443. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.23700. View

20.

Ellakwa A, Raj T, Deeb S, Ronaghi G, Martin F, Klineberg I . Influence of implant abutment angulations on the fracture resistance of overlaying CAM-milled zirconia single crowns. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56(2):132-40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01314.x. View