Fracture loads and failure modes of customized and non-customized zirconia abutments
Source abstract
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to evaluate the fracture load and pattern of customized and non-customized zirconia abutments with Morse-taper connection. Methods 18 implants were divided into 3 groups according to the abutments used: Zr - with non-customized zirconia abutments; Zrc - with customized zirconia abutments; and Ti - with titanium abutments. To test their load capacity, a universal test machine with a 500-kgf load cell and a 0.5-mm/min speed were used. After, one implant-abutment assembly from each group was analyzed by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). For fractographic analysis, the specimens were transversely sectioned above the threads of the abutment screw in order to examine their fracture surfaces using SEM. Results A significant difference was noted between the groups (Zr=573.7±11.66N, Zrc=768.0±8.72N and Ti=659.1±7.70N). Also, the zirconia abutments fractured while the titanium abutments deformed plastically. Zrc presented fracture loads significantly higher than Zr (p=0.009). All the zirconia abutments fractured below the implant platform, starting from the area of contact between the abutment and implant and propagating to the internal surface of the abutment. All the zirconia abutments presented complete cleavage in the mechanical test. Fractography detected differences in the position and pattern of fracture between the two groups with zirconia abutments, probably because of the different diameters in the transmucosal region. Significance Customization of zirconia abutments did not affect their fracture loads, which were comparable to that of titanium and much higher than the maximum physiological limit for the anterior region of the maxilla.
Source: europepmc · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental materials and restorations · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. Measurement of the rotational misfit and implant-abutment gap of all ceramic abutments
2. Esthetic option for the implant-supported single-tooth restoration — treatment sequence with a ceramic abutment
3. An in vitro evaluation of titanium, zirconia, and alumina procera abutments with hexagonal connection
4. In vivo fracture resistance of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00514-6 ↗
5. Evaluation of hardness and fracture toughness, coupled with microstructural analysis, of zirconia ceramics stored in environments with different pH values10.4012/dmj.2012-005 ↗
6. State of the art of zirconia for dental applications10.1016/j.dental.2007.05.007 ↗
7. Concerns of hydrothermal degradation in CAD/CAM zirconia10.1177/0022034509354193 ↗
8. In vitro fracture toughness of commercial Y-TZP ceramics: a systematic review10.1111/jopr.12179 ↗
9. Transformation-toughened zirconia for dental inlays, crowns and bridges: chemical stability and effect of low-temperature aging on flexural strength and surface structure10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00095-1 ↗
10. Low-temperature ageing of zirconia-toughened alumina ceramics and its implication in biomedical implants10.1016/S0955-2219(03)00313-3 ↗
11. A study of the bending resistance of implant-supported reinforced alumina and machined zirconia abutments and copies10.1016/j.dental.2007.05.021 ↗
12. Postfatigue fracture resistance of modified prefabricated zirconia implant abutments10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.08.023 ↗
13. Fracture resistance of yttrium oxide partially-stabilized zirconia all-ceramic bridges after veneering and mechanical fatigue testing10.1016/j.dental.2004.07.013 ↗
14. Bending moments and types of failure of zirconia and titanium abutments with internal implant-abutment connections: a laboratory study
15. Influence of zirconia abutment preparation on the fracture strength of single implant lithium disilicate crowns after chewing simulations10.1111/clr.12058 ↗
16. Postfatigue fracture resistance of modified prefabricated zirconia implant abutments10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.08.023 ↗
17. Fracture resistance of titanium and zirconia abutments: an in vitro study10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60306-6 ↗
18. Fractography: determining the sites of fracture initiation10.1016/0109-5641(95)80045-X ↗
19. Fractographic analyses of three ceramic whole crown restoration failures10.1016/j.dental.2005.01.006 ↗
20. ADM guidance — ceramics: guidance to the use of fractography in failure analyusis of brittle materials10.1016/j.dental.2017.03.004 ↗
21. Fractographic ceramic failure analyses using the replica technique10.1016/j.dental.2006.12.002 ↗
22. Fractographic analyses of zirconia-based fixed partial dentures10.1016/j.dental.2007.12.006 ↗
23. Fractographic analysis of a dental zirconia framework: a case study on design issues10.1016/j.jmbbm.2010.07.004 ↗
24. Lack of integration of smooth titanium surfaces: a working hypothesis based on strains generated in the surrounding bone10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100601.x ↗
25. Fatigue resistance of two implant/abutment joint designs10.1067/mpr.2002.129384 ↗
26. Okeson · 1998
27. Quantitative study of bite force during sleep associated bruxism10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00692.x ↗
28. Influence of preparation and wall thickness on the resistance to fracture of zirconia implant abutments10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00428.x ↗
29. Fracture resistance of yttria-stabilized zirconia dental implant abutments10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00378.x ↗