2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.02.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of different implant–abutment connections on micromotion and stress distribution: Prediction of microgap formation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
72
1
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(85 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(54 reference statements)
3
72
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Two forces of 100 N are applied on the occlusal area. One force (F 1 ) pointing in axial direction and the other (F 2 ) with a buccallingual orientation and a tilt angle of 45°as shown in Figure 3 [8,9]. Principal boundary conditions are summarized in Table 2.…”
Section: Boundary Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two forces of 100 N are applied on the occlusal area. One force (F 1 ) pointing in axial direction and the other (F 2 ) with a buccallingual orientation and a tilt angle of 45°as shown in Figure 3 [8,9]. Principal boundary conditions are summarized in Table 2.…”
Section: Boundary Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These micro-gaps and retentive areas at dental implant interfaces are the most susceptible for bacterial colonization and biofilm formation, which can exert a strong influence on corrosion and wear processes with further inflammation of peri-implant soft and hard tissues. Degradation and inflammatory processes can contribute to the loss of mechanical integrity of metallic structures influencing the magnitude of micromovements between dental implant components, and furthermore, compromise the long-term health of peri-implant tissues [13,20,[23][24][25][26][27]. Adverse biological reactions such as gingival swelling and erythema, mucosal pain, and lichenoid reactions can be induced by the metallic ions released during corrosion of dental alloys [28].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the abutment screw became loose and was not retightened immediately in a 2-piece abutment, the abutment might have acted as a lever with the hexagonal antirotational part becoming one of the most mechanically vulnerable points against the functional load. 15 Precautious regular evaluation and immediate treatment should have been performed to prevent more complications. A fractured abutment fragment is difficult to remove, and the prosthesis requires replacement.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, when the conical frictional resistance is lost, higher stresses concentrate at the superior part or geometric discontinuities of the abutment, which have a higher tendency to microfracture. 15 A fractured component in the dental implant can pose a significant clinical challenge. Preloading the abutment screw and occlusal loading could wedge the fractured abutment into the implant and require high pull-out force.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%