In Vitro Comparison of Modes of Failures among Titanium and One- and Two-piece Zirconia Abutment under Static Load

Abstract

ObjectivesThe objective was to assess modes of failures under static load (SL) among titanium (Ti) and one-and two-piece zirconia abutment (ZA) in vitro. Materials and MethodsThe Ti abutments were digitally scanned for the fabrication of the one-and two-piece zirconia abutment specimens. This was done to standardize the design of the one-piece abutment and make it the blueprint of the Ti abutment. Twenty-one implant abutments and 21 implant replicas were categorized into three groups as follows: group 1 (Titanium group), group 2 (one-piece ZA group), and group 3 (two-piece ZA group). A 250K-cycle, linear fatigue-load, reaching 10 to 210 Newton (N), was put on all specimens using an all-electric dynamic test instrument and the specimens were loaded until fracture. Statistical Analysis Assessment of mode of fracture among the groups was done visually. Significance was based below 0.05. Results Screw fracture (n = 7) and abutment bending at the apical part (n = 7) occurred in the Ti group. In the one-piece zirconia group, screw and abutment fractures occurred in seven and seven cases, respectively. In the two-piece zirconia group, screw fracture (n = 7) above the Ti zirconia junction (transgingival segment) and abutment fracture (n = 7) were determined as the failure modes. Conclusion In conclusion, all abutments underwent failures under SL in vitro; and the mode of failure modes varied among the different abutment designs used. AbstractKeywords ► fracture resistance ► mode of fracture ► static load ► titanium ► zirconia

Effect of Different Customized Abutment Types on Stress Distribution in Implant‐Supported Single Crown: A 3D Finite Element Analysis

“…However, in the present study, the risk of complication in hybrid‐abutment‐crown and screw was high in Ti‐Hybrid. Similarly, previous studies showed that the typical failure mode of titanium abutment was screw fracture, screw bending, and abutment bending 40,41 …”

“…Interestingly, the Ti‐base, which was designed as the stress absorber, can improve stress distribution at the implant‐bone interface, decrease implant deformation risk, and secure peri‐implant bone loss 5,15 . It had been shown that the typical failure mode of Ti was screw fracture and abutment bending, while the typical failure mode of Zir‐TiBase was screw bending and abutment fracture 40,41 . Consequently, the complication risk of screw loosening and bending in Zir‐TiBase must be observed cautiously.…”

“…5,15 It had been shown that the typical failure mode of Ti was screw fracture and abutment bending, while the typical failure mode of Zir-TiBase was screw bending and abutment fracture. 40,41 Consequently, the complication risk of screw loosening and bending in Zir-TiBase must be observed cautiously.…”

“…Similarly, previous studies showed that the typical failure mode of titanium abutment was screw fracture, screw bending, and abutment bending. 40,41 By comparing the Zir-TiBase and Zir-Hybrid-TiBase groups, it was shown that the combination of zirconia hybridabutment-crown generated the worst stress distribution at hybrid-abutment-crown and implant in Zir-Hybrid-TiBase, especially the occluded area of hybrid-abutment-crown. However, the combination dominantly improved stress distribution at the screw.…”

In vitro Simulation of Periodontal Ligament in Fatigue Testing of Dental Crowns

“…In vitro studies, whether simplified or with complex approaches add to our understanding of the properties and mechanical behavior of dental materials and restorations. 1 2 Two different approaches of in vitro studies can be identified in the literature; studies aim at measuring physical and mechanical properties, and studies aim to simulate clinical behavior. 3 Although the first approach is important in providing information about material properties, estimating failure risk and comparing material variants, 4 it is known clinically that failures of all-ceramic restorations are a complex process which occur mostly as a result of fatigue stresses in challenging oral conditions.…”