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

Mechanical testing setup with implants positioned in a 30° off-axis orientation.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 4: Mechanical testing setup with implants positioned in a 30° off-axis orientation.

Mentions: To perform an aging test, a semicircular, cobalt-chrome cast sleeve was cemented on the machined titanium abutment using permanent glass ionomer luting cement (Ketac™ Cem, 3M, ST. Paul, United States) to simulate cyclic load. Fifty-six samples (eight per screw type) were subjected to dynamic loading at 30° in a single-axis chewing simulator using 150,000 load cycles at 50 N and 50 Hz. All surviving samples in the DL Subgroup and all samples in the NDL Subgroup were tested for fracture strength in a universal testing machine (Quasar 5; Galdabini, Cardano al Campo, Italy). A cobalt-chrome cast sleeve with a flat face was cemented on the abutment using permanent glass ionomer luting cement. The cylinders with implants and abutments were fixed at an angle of 30° to the implant axis and direction of loading. The load center was situated 11 mm from the platform of the implant (Fig. 4). The load was applied in a progressive manner at a speed of 5 mm/min until the implant-abutment connection failed.


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)

Mechanical testing setup with implants positioned in a 30° off-axis orientation.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 4: Mechanical testing setup with implants positioned in a 30° off-axis orientation.
Mentions: To perform an aging test, a semicircular, cobalt-chrome cast sleeve was cemented on the machined titanium abutment using permanent glass ionomer luting cement (Ketac™ Cem, 3M, ST. Paul, United States) to simulate cyclic load. Fifty-six samples (eight per screw type) were subjected to dynamic loading at 30° in a single-axis chewing simulator using 150,000 load cycles at 50 N and 50 Hz. All surviving samples in the DL Subgroup and all samples in the NDL Subgroup were tested for fracture strength in a universal testing machine (Quasar 5; Galdabini, Cardano al Campo, Italy). A cobalt-chrome cast sleeve with a flat face was cemented on the abutment using permanent glass ionomer luting cement. The cylinders with implants and abutments were fixed at an angle of 30° to the implant axis and direction of loading. The load center was situated 11 mm from the platform of the implant (Fig. 4). The load was applied in a progressive manner at a speed of 5 mm/min until the implant-abutment connection failed.

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