Abstract

Aim: With the emphasis on success of implant supported prosthesis, and health of the surrounding tissues that are related to accuracy, and fit between the implant components, stability at implant abutment interface is of prime importance. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the stress distribution in three unit cement retained implant supported fixed partial denture with different implant abutment connections through photo elasticity. Materials and methods: Two photo elastic resin models were fabricated of standard dimensions (44mmx22mmx10mm). Group I sample: Three unit cement retained implant supported fixed partial denture with Internal implant abutment connection (Internal hexagonal connection) (Paltop Advanced, Keystone Dental Company, US)Group II sample: Three unit cement retained implant supported fixed partial denture with conical Morse taper connection (1.5 degree Morse taper) (Paltop Conical Active, Keystone Dental Company, US). Three unit cement retained implant supported fixed partial denture simulated missing mandibular first molar. Axial and oblique loads of 100N were placed on each implant and pontic area for 10 sec. Ten tests were done for each group. The stress values around the implants were derived from the colored fringe patterns obtained through polariscope, which were photographed after load applications from which values were derived. Results: Under axial loading, there was statistically significant difference between internal hexagonal connection and Morse taper connection in three unit implant supported prosthesis. Stresses were more in Group II sample with Morse taper connection. Under oblique loading, there was no statistically significant difference between Group I and Group II samples. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, it can be concluded that Internal hexagonal connection showed less stresses as compared to Morse taper connection in a three unit cement retained implant supported prosthesis. Stresses were concentrated more in apical area under axial loading; while under oblique loading stresses were seen on the side of application of force on the body of the implant and on the apical region. However, stresses were uniformly distributed in both groups I and group II samples. In both groups stresses under oblique loading were more than axial loading, but that was not statistically significant.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call