Volume 4, Issue 2 (6-2019)
J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2019, 4(2): 12-18 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Jalalian E, Banifatemeh A, Zarbakhsh A, Eskandari damaneh A, Hashemi E, Shariaty M. Comparison of the Effect of Two Different Abutment Diameters on Detorque Value Using Cyclic Loading and Thermocycling. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2019; 4 (2) :12-18
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-251-en.html
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-251-en.html
1- Associate Professor, Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences
2- Postgraduate student, Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ,a.banyfatemeh@gmail.com
3- Postgraduate student, Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences
2- Postgraduate student, Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ,
3- Postgraduate student, Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences
Abstract: (2843 Views)
Background and Aim: Screw loosening is a common problem with both screw-retained and cemented implant restorations. It is assumed that the abutment diameter affects detorque value and screw loosening. We aimed to determine the effect of two different abutment diameters on detorque value using cyclic loading and thermocycling.
Materials and Methods: This in-vitro experimental study was conducted on sixteen Morse-taper implants (4×10 mm) with two different diameters (3.9 and 5.2 mm) installed with a 25-Ncm torque (n=8). Eight screws from each group (3.9- and 5.2-mm abutments) were maintained for a month in a stable state while the rest of the screws underwent cyclic loading for 10,000 cycles with the frequency of 1 Hz and force of 75 N/cm. Then, thermocycling was done at 5-55°C. Detorque value was determined using the torque meter used for screw tightening. Removal torque values were recorded. Maximum deformation force and fracture resistance were documented. Data were analyzed according to Student's t-test using SPSS 21.0 software.
Results: Detorque values were 18.25±1.91 and 21.13±1.46 Ncm with 3.9- and 5.2-mm abutments, respectively. Detorque loss value was 15.50±5.83% with 5.2-mm abutment and 27±7.63% with 3.9-mm abutment. The mean difference between the two abutment diameters was 2.87±0.85 Ncm. Significant differences were observed on torque loss with 3.9-mm- compared to 5.2-mm-diameter abutments (P=0.004).
Conclusion: The results suggested that torque loss was lower with 5.2-mm abutment diameter.
Materials and Methods: This in-vitro experimental study was conducted on sixteen Morse-taper implants (4×10 mm) with two different diameters (3.9 and 5.2 mm) installed with a 25-Ncm torque (n=8). Eight screws from each group (3.9- and 5.2-mm abutments) were maintained for a month in a stable state while the rest of the screws underwent cyclic loading for 10,000 cycles with the frequency of 1 Hz and force of 75 N/cm. Then, thermocycling was done at 5-55°C. Detorque value was determined using the torque meter used for screw tightening. Removal torque values were recorded. Maximum deformation force and fracture resistance were documented. Data were analyzed according to Student's t-test using SPSS 21.0 software.
Results: Detorque values were 18.25±1.91 and 21.13±1.46 Ncm with 3.9- and 5.2-mm abutments, respectively. Detorque loss value was 15.50±5.83% with 5.2-mm abutment and 27±7.63% with 3.9-mm abutment. The mean difference between the two abutment diameters was 2.87±0.85 Ncm. Significant differences were observed on torque loss with 3.9-mm- compared to 5.2-mm-diameter abutments (P=0.004).
Conclusion: The results suggested that torque loss was lower with 5.2-mm abutment diameter.
Type of Study: Original article |
Subject:
Dental implant
References
1. Chaar MS, Att JR, Strub JR. Prosthetic outcome of cement-retained implant-supported fixed dental restorations: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil. 2011;38:697-711. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2011.02209.x] [PMID]
2. Rismanchian M, Hatami M, Badrian H, Khalighinejad N, Goroohi H. Evaluation of microgap size and microbial leakage in the connection area of 4 abutments with Straumann (ITI) implant. J Oral Implantol. 2012;38(6):677-85. [DOI:10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00167] [PMID]
3. Assunção WG, Barão VA, Delben JA, Gomes ÉA, Garcia IR Jr. Effect of unilateral misfit on preload of retention screws of implant-supported prostheses submitted to mechanical cycling. J Prosthodont Res. 2011;55(1):12-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.jpor.2010.05.002] [PMID]
4. Lorenzoni FC, Coelho PG, Bonfante G, Carvalho RM, Silva NR, Suzuki M, et al. Sealing capability and SEM observation of the implant-abutment interface. Int J Dent. 2011;2011:864183. [DOI:10.1155/2011/864183] [PMID] [PMCID]
5. Shin HM, Huh JB, Yun MJ, Jeon YC, Chang B, Chang M. Influence of the implant-abutment connection design and diameter on the screw joint stability. Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(2):126-32. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2014.6.2.126] [PMID] [PMCID]
6. Bhering CL, Takahashi JM, Luthi LF, Henriques GE, Consani RL, Mesquita MF. Influence of the casting technique and dynamic loading on screw detorque and misfit of single unit implant-supported prostheses. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013 May-Jul;71(3-4):404-9. [DOI:10.3109/00016357.2012.690528] [PMID]
7. Sahin C, Ayyildiz S. Correlation between microleakage and screw loosening at implant-abutment connection. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(1):35-8. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2014.6.1.35] [PMID] [PMCID]
8. Kim ES, Shin SY. Influence of the implant abutment types and the dynamic loading on initial screw loosening. J Adv Prosthodont. 2013 Feb;5(1):21-8.. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2013.5.1.21] [PMID] [PMCID]
9. Mao Z, Yi D, Cao G. Influence of sizes of abutments and fixation screws on dental implant system: a non-linear finite element analysis. Biomed Tech (Berl). 2017 Aug 28;62(4):357-64. [DOI:10.1515/bmt-2015-0074] [PMID]
10. Moris IC, Faria AC, de Mattos Mda G, Ribeiro RF, Rodrigues RC. Mechanical analysis of conventional and small diameter conical implant abutments. J Adv Prosthodont. 2012 Aug;4(3):158-61. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2012.4.3.158] [PMID] [PMCID]
11. Lillo R, Parra C, Fuentes R, Borie E, Engelke W, Beltrán V. Compressive resistance of abutments with different diameters and transmucosal heights in Morse-taper implants. Braz Dent J. 2015 Mar-Apr;26(2):156-9. [DOI:10.1590/0103-6440201300221] [PMID]
12. Junqueira MC, Ribeiro RF, Faria ACL, Macedo AP, Almeida RP. Screw loosening of different UCLA-type abutments after mechanical cycling. Braz J Oral Sci. 2013;12(3):228-32. [DOI:10.1590/S1677-32252013000300014]
13. Torres JH, Mechali M, Romieu O, Tramini P, Callas S, Cuisinier FJ, et al. Development of a new quantitative gas permeability method for dental implant-abutment connection tightness assessment. Biomed Eng Online. 2011 Apr 14;10:28. [DOI:10.1186/1475-925X-10-28] [PMID] [PMCID]
14. Harder S, Dimaczek B, Açil Y, Terheyden H, Freitag-Wolf S, Kern M. Molecular leakage at implant-abutment connection--in vitro investigation of tightness of internal conical implant-abutment connections against endotoxin penetration. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14(4):427-32. [DOI:10.1007/s00784-009-0317-x] [PMID]
15. Cho SC, Small PN, Elian N, Tarnow D. Screw loosening for standard and wide diameter implants in partially edentulous cases: 3- to 7-year longitudinal data. Implant Dent. 2004 Sep;13(3):245-50. [DOI:10.1097/01.id.0000140459.87333.f8] [PMID]
16. Arshad M, Shirani G, Refoua S, Rahimi Yeganeh M. Comparative study of abutment screw loosening with or without adhesive material. J Adv Prosthodont. 2017 Apr;9(2):99-103. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2017.9.2.99] [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Perriard J, Wiskott WA, Mellal A, Scherrer SS, Botsis J, Belser UC. Fatigue resistance of ITI implant-abutment connectors - a comparison of the standard cone with a novel internally keyed design. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002 Oct;13(5):542-9. [DOI:10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130515.x] [PMID]
18. Jalalian E, Hashemi E, Naser Mostufi SH, Banifatemeh AR, Shariati M, Pirmoazen A, et al. Effect of Abutment Connection Type and Cyclic Loading on Removal Torque Value. J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci. 2019;4(1):36-40. [DOI:10.29252/jrdms.4.1.36]
19. de Sá BCM, Andrighetto AR, Bernardes SR, Tiossi R. Fracture Strength of Standard and Small Diameter Prosthetic Abutments for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Restorations. J Oral Implantol. 2017 Jun;43(3):175-9. [DOI:10.1563/aaid-joi-D-16-00108] [PMID]
20. Choi KS, Lozada JL, Kan JY, Lee SH, Kim CS, Kwon TG. Study of an experimental microthreaded scalloped implant design: proximal bone healing at different interimplant distances in a canine model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25:681-9.
21. Zeno HA, Buitrago RL, Sternberger SS, Patt ME, Tovar N, Coelho P, et al. The effect of tissue entrapment on screw loosening at the implant/abutment interface of external- and internal-connection implants: An in vitro study. J Prosthodont. 2016 Apr;25(3):216-23. [DOI:10.1111/jopr.12329] [PMID]
22. Cho WR, Huh YH, Park CJ, Cho LR. Effect of cyclic loading and retightening on reverse torque value in external and internal implants. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015 Aug;7(4):288-293. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2015.7.4.288] [PMID] [PMCID]
23. Gross M, Abramovich I, Weiss EI. Microleakage at the abutment- implant interface of osseointegrated implants: a comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999 Jan-Feb;14(1):94-100.
24. Dixon DL, Breeding LC, Sadler JP, McKay ML. Comparison of screw loosening, rotation, and deflection among three implant designs. J Prosthet Dent. 1995 Sep;74(3):270-8. [DOI:10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80134-9]
25. Duan Y, Griggs JA. Effect of loading frequency on cyclic fatigue lifetime of a standard-diameter implant with an internal abutment connection. Dent Mater. 2018 Dec;34(12):1711-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2018.09.001] [PMID]
26. Arshad M, Mahgoli H, Payaminia L. Effect of Repeated Screw Joint Closing and Opening Cycles and Cyclic Loading on Abutment Screw Removal Torque and Screw Thread Morphology: Scanning Electron Microscopy Evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 Jan/Feb;33(1):31-40. [DOI:10.11607/jomi.5476] [PMID]
27. Cibirka RM, Nelson SK, Lang BR, Rueggeberg FA. Examination of the implant-abutment interface after fatigue testing. J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Mar;85(3):268-75. [DOI:10.1067/mpr.2001.114266] [PMID]
28. Al-Turki LE, Chai J, Lautenschlager EP, Hutten MC. Changes in prosthetic screw stability because of misfit of implant-supported prostheses. Int J Prosthodont. 2002 Jan-Feb;15(1):38-42.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
