Abstract
Objective: To compare stress transmission around implants with abutments made of three different materials using photoelastic, strain gage (SGA) and finite element (FEA) analyses. Methods: Three abutments – UCLA calcinable, cast in Ni-Cr; UCLA calcinable with a Cr-Co cervical collar, overcast with Ni-Cr; and a zirconia abutment – were installed on implants embedded in photoelastic resin. Vertical and oblique loads were applied to the abutments to the photoelastic and SGA analyses. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests (a=0.05). The assembly was modeled to FEA simulation. Results: Similar fringe orders were observed in the apical region under vertical load. The greatest fringe orders were observed in the coronal region of the opposite side of load application (contralateral side) under oblique load. By SGA, no statistical difference was observed among the abutments (P=0.061) under vertical load, and no difference was found between tensile and compression sides under oblique load. FEA showed no difference in stress distribution. The oblique load generated the greatest stress values on the contralateral side in the coronal area. Conclusion: Although it was not possible to establish an agreement among the analytical methods tested, different abutment materials did not influence the transmission of stresses around implants.
Highlights
Masticatory functional loads are normally transferred through the implants to the peri-implant bone [1]
It is known that the abutment material influences the location and quality of the peri-implant mucosa attachment [6], but differences in physical properties of abutments, such as elastic modulus or marginal fit could play a role in stress distribution in bone
Three abutments (Conexão Sistema de Próteses – São Paulo, Brazil) were used in this study: a UCLA calcinable abutment, which was cast in Ni-Cr; a UCLA calcinable abutment with a Cr-Co cervical collar, which was overcast with Ni-Cr; and a zirconia abutment
Summary
Masticatory functional loads are normally transferred through the implants to the peri-implant bone [1]. Bone can tolerate physiologic loads, but excessive stresses may result in resorption, leading to esthetic cervical defects and implant loss [2]. Stress distribution around implants depends on several factors, such as implant design and diameter [3], abutment length [4], angulation [1] and its relationship with the implant platform [5]. It is known that the abutment material influences the location and quality of the peri-implant mucosa attachment [6], but differences in physical properties of abutments, such as elastic modulus or marginal fit could play a role in stress distribution in bone. De Torres et al [7] reported that framework material influence bone stress, Abreu et al [8] did not find this correlation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
