Exploring prosthetic screw rupture in titanium and zirconia superstructures under various conditions
Source abstract
Abstract
The fastening mechanics of prosthetic screws under various conditions is crucial to the maintenance of dental implants. This study comprehensively explores the prosthetic screw rupture in titanium (Ti) and zirconia (ZrO2) superstructures under wet and dry conditions. Superstructures were fabricated using digital technology and subjected to tightening torque trials. Experimental results suggested that the implications of the conventionally recommended torque of 15 N•cm differ significantly between dry and wet environments. Both Ti and ZrO2 exhibited preloads of >30 N•cm under dry conditions; however, differences emerged under wet conditions. In addition, screw rupture posed a prominent clinical challenge —particularly during long-term cyclic loading. Notably, the ZrO2 superstructures exhibited a greater resistance to breaking torque than that of Ti. This study underscores the importance of reevaluating torque recommendations with consideration to the distinct characteristics of Ti and ZrO2 in diverse environments.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty · Dental materials and restorations
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Oral Function Management, Showa University Graduate School of Dentistry
Department of Biomaterials and Engineering, Showa University School of Dentistry
Department of Dental Education, Showa University School of Dentistry
Department of Implant Dentistry, Showa University School of Dentistry
References (26)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Brånemark PI, Jemt T. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990; 5: 347-359.
2. 2) Lekholm U, Gunne J, Henry P, Higuchi, K, Lindén, U, Bergström, C, et al. Survival of the Brånemark implant in partially edentulous jaws: A 10-year prospective multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14: 639-645.
3. 3) Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part I: Surgical results. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 63: 451-457.10.1016/0022-3913(90)90237-7 ↗
4. 4) Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: The Toronto Study. Part II: The prosthetic results. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64: 53-61.10.1016/0022-3913(90)90153-4 ↗
5. 5) Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: The Toronto study. Part III: Problems and complications encountered. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64: 185-194.10.1016/0022-3913(90)90177-E ↗
6. 6) Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Brånemark implants in edentulous jaws: A study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to The first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991; 6: 270-276.
7. 7) Jemt T, Book K. Prosthesis misfit and marginal bone loss in edentulous implant patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996; 11: 620-625.
8. 8) Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Bohsali K, Goodacre CJ, Lang BR. Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 81: 7-13.10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70229-5 ↗
9. 9) Wee AG, Aquilino SA, Schneider RL. Strategies to achieve fit in implant prosthodontics: A review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont 1999; 12: 167-178.
10. 10) Wicks RA, Derijk WG, Windeler AS. An evaluation of fit in osseointegrated implant components using torque/turn analysis. J Prosthodont 1994; 3: 206-212.10.1111/j.1532-849X.1994.tb00157.x ↗
11. 11) Papaspyridakos P, Chen C-J, Chuang S-K, Weber H-P, Gallucci GO. A systematic review of biologic and technical complications with fixed implant rehabilitations for edentulous patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 102-110.
12. 12) Binon P, Sutter F, Beaty K, Brunaski J, Gulbransen H, Weiner R. The role of screws in implant system. Quintessence Dent Implantol 1995; 2: 446-467.
13. 13) Yanagida H, Islam N, Sato Y, Kitagawa N, Uchida K. Influence of implants diameter on maximum resistant load. Dent Med Res 2009; 29: 128-133.10.7881/dentalmedres.29.128 ↗
14. 14) Sekiya M, Uchida K, Sato Y. Validity of maximum resistance loads of superstructures in biomechanical analysis. J Jpn Soc Oral Implantol 2011; 24: 17-22.
15. 15) Shiba H, Sato Y, Furuya J, Osawa T, Isobe A, Hayashi M, et al. Experimental study on the factors affecting torque of beam-type implant torque wrenches. BMC Oral Health 2021; 21: 344.10.1186/s12903-021-01703-z ↗
16. 16) Sato Y, Abe Y, Yuasa Y, Akagawa Y. Effect of friction coefficient on Akers clasp retention. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 78: 22-27.10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70083-0 ↗
17. 17) Katsoulis J, Mericske Stern R, Rotkina L, Zbären C, Enkling N, Blatz MB. Precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained 10-unit computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured frameworks made from zirconium dioxide and titanium: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25: 165-174.10.1111/clr.12039 ↗
18. 18) Katsoulis J, Müller P, Mericske Stern R, Blatz MB. CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015; 26: 245-249.10.1111/clr.12522 ↗
19. 19) Kihara H, Hatakeyama W, Kondo H, Yamamori T, Baba K. Current complications and issues of implant superstructure. J Oral Sci 2022; 64: 257-262.10.2334/josnusd.21-0534 ↗
20. 20) Nigro F, Sendyk CL, Francischone CE. Removal torque of zirconia abutment screws under dry and wet conditions. Braz Dent J 2010; 21: 225-228.10.1590/S0103-64402010000300009 ↗
21. 21) Al Rafee MA, Nagy WW, Fournelle RA, Dhuru VB, Tzenakis GK, Pechous CE. The effect of repeated torque on the ultimate tensile strength of slotted gold prosthetic screws. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 176-182.10.1067/mpr.2002.127652 ↗
22. 22) Burguete RL, Johns RB, King T, Patterson EA. Tightening characteristics for screwed joints in osseointegrated dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 1994; 71: 592-599.10.1016/0022-3913(94)90443-X ↗
23. 23) Merz BR, Hunenbart S, Belser UC. Mechanics of the implant-abutment connection: An 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; 15: 519-526.
24. 24) Strub JR, Gerds T. Fracture strength and failure mode of five different single-tooth implant-abutment combinations. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16: 167-171.
25. 25) Tzenakis GK, Nagy WW, Fournelle RA, Dhuru VB. The effect of repeated torque and salivary contamination on the preload of slotted gold implant prosthetic screws. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 183-191.10.1067/mpr.2002.127604 ↗
26. 26) Wada M, Kimura T, Suganami T, Maeda Y, Koyano K, Otsuka T, et al. Questionnaire survey on the outcome of elderly patient who received implant treatment. J Jpn Soc Oral Implantol 2013; 26: 717-722.