Limits...
In-vitro development of a temporal abutment screw to protect osseointegration in immediate loaded implants.

García-Roncero H, Caballé-Serrano J, Cano-Batalla J, Cabratosa-Termes J, Figueras-Álvarez O - J Adv Prosthodont (2015)

Bottom Line: Dynamic loading was performed in a single-axis chewing simulator using 150,000 load cycles at 50 N.Confidence interval was set at 95%.Screw Prototypes 2, 5 and 6 failed during dynamic loading and exhibited statistically significant differences from the other prototypes.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: In this study, a temporal abutment fixation screw, designed to fracture in a controlled way upon application of an occlusal force sufficient to produce critical micromotion was developed. The purpose of the screw was to protect the osseointegration of immediate loaded single implants.

Materials and methods: Seven different screw prototypes were examined by fixing titanium abutments to 112 Mozo-Grau external hexagon implants (MG Osseous®; Mozo-Grau, S.A., Valladolid, Spain). Fracture strength was tested at 30° in two subgroups per screw: one under dynamic loading and the other without prior dynamic loading. Dynamic loading was performed in a single-axis chewing simulator using 150,000 load cycles at 50 N. After normal distribution of obtained data was verified by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, fracture resistance between samples submitted and not submitted to dynamic loading was compared by the use of Student's t-test. Comparison of fracture resistance among different screw designs was performed by the use of one-way analysis of variance. Confidence interval was set at 95%.

Results: Fractures occurred in all screws, allowing easy retrieval. Screw Prototypes 2, 5 and 6 failed during dynamic loading and exhibited statistically significant differences from the other prototypes.

Conclusion: Prototypes 2, 5 and 6 may offer a useful protective mechanism during occlusal overload in immediate loaded implants.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Schematic diagram of the screwdriver/implant/prosthesis (A) control screw in the abutment. (B) Prototype 1 screw in the abutment. (C) Prototype 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 screw in the abutment.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4414947&req=5

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the screwdriver/implant/prosthesis (A) control screw in the abutment. (B) Prototype 1 screw in the abutment. (C) Prototype 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 screw in the abutment.

Mentions: Seven types of Grade IV titanium screw fixing machined abutments to 112 external 3.75 × 13 mm hex implants (MG Osseous®; Mozo-Grau, S.A., Valladolid, Spain) were studied. The control screw was a titanium screw for definitive prostheses (Mozo-Grau, S.A.), whereas the other six were prototypes designed for this in-vitro study. The control screw comprised Grade IV titanium, with a hexagonal socket head cap measuring 1.25 mm in diameter (Fig. 1A). The prototype screws had hollow, smooth heads, with a hexagonal socket at the same level as the shank. Prototype 1 hexagonal socket was 0.9 mm in diameter (Fig. 1B and 2A), whereas Prototypes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 hexagonal socket were 1.25 mm in diameter (Fig. 1C and 2B). Prototypes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 differed in thickness at the level of the head shank union (Fig. 3). Table 1 shows the group allocation and dimensions of each prototype.


In-vitro development of a temporal abutment screw to protect osseointegration in immediate loaded implants.

García-Roncero H, Caballé-Serrano J, Cano-Batalla J, Cabratosa-Termes J, Figueras-Álvarez O - J Adv Prosthodont (2015)

Schematic diagram of the screwdriver/implant/prosthesis (A) control screw in the abutment. (B) Prototype 1 screw in the abutment. (C) Prototype 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 screw in the abutment.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4414947&req=5

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the screwdriver/implant/prosthesis (A) control screw in the abutment. (B) Prototype 1 screw in the abutment. (C) Prototype 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 screw in the abutment.
Mentions: Seven types of Grade IV titanium screw fixing machined abutments to 112 external 3.75 × 13 mm hex implants (MG Osseous®; Mozo-Grau, S.A., Valladolid, Spain) were studied. The control screw was a titanium screw for definitive prostheses (Mozo-Grau, S.A.), whereas the other six were prototypes designed for this in-vitro study. The control screw comprised Grade IV titanium, with a hexagonal socket head cap measuring 1.25 mm in diameter (Fig. 1A). The prototype screws had hollow, smooth heads, with a hexagonal socket at the same level as the shank. Prototype 1 hexagonal socket was 0.9 mm in diameter (Fig. 1B and 2A), whereas Prototypes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 hexagonal socket were 1.25 mm in diameter (Fig. 1C and 2B). Prototypes 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 differed in thickness at the level of the head shank union (Fig. 3). Table 1 shows the group allocation and dimensions of each prototype.

Bottom Line: Dynamic loading was performed in a single-axis chewing simulator using 150,000 load cycles at 50 N.Confidence interval was set at 95%.Screw Prototypes 2, 5 and 6 failed during dynamic loading and exhibited statistically significant differences from the other prototypes.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: In this study, a temporal abutment fixation screw, designed to fracture in a controlled way upon application of an occlusal force sufficient to produce critical micromotion was developed. The purpose of the screw was to protect the osseointegration of immediate loaded single implants.

Materials and methods: Seven different screw prototypes were examined by fixing titanium abutments to 112 Mozo-Grau external hexagon implants (MG Osseous®; Mozo-Grau, S.A., Valladolid, Spain). Fracture strength was tested at 30° in two subgroups per screw: one under dynamic loading and the other without prior dynamic loading. Dynamic loading was performed in a single-axis chewing simulator using 150,000 load cycles at 50 N. After normal distribution of obtained data was verified by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, fracture resistance between samples submitted and not submitted to dynamic loading was compared by the use of Student's t-test. Comparison of fracture resistance among different screw designs was performed by the use of one-way analysis of variance. Confidence interval was set at 95%.

Results: Fractures occurred in all screws, allowing easy retrieval. Screw Prototypes 2, 5 and 6 failed during dynamic loading and exhibited statistically significant differences from the other prototypes.

Conclusion: Prototypes 2, 5 and 6 may offer a useful protective mechanism during occlusal overload in immediate loaded implants.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus