Abstract
Background: The present in vitro study aimed to investigate the fatigue performance of different dental fixtures in two different emergence profiles. Biological failures are frequently reported because the problem canonly be solved by replacing a failing implant with a new one. Clinicians addressed minor mechanical failures, such as bending, loosening or the fracture of screws, abutment, or the entire prosthesis, by simply replacing or fixing them. Methods: Transmucosal and submerged bone-level dental implants underwent fatigue strength tests (statical and dynamical performance) by a standardized test: UNI EN ISO 14801:2016. Two types of emergence profiles (Premium sub-crestal straight implant with a cylindrical-shaped coronal emergence or Prama one-piece cylindrical-shape implant with transmucosal convergent neck and hyperbolic geometry) were tested, and dynamic fatigue were run to failure. Data was analyzed by a suitable statistical tool. Results: The Wöhler curve of 0.38 cm Premium group c2, appeared to be significantly different from that of the 0.38 cm Prama group c3 (nonparametric one-way ANOVA χ2 = 6; degree of freedom = 1; probability = 0.0043) but not from that of the 0.33 cm Premium group c1 (nonparametric one-way ANOVA χ2 = 0.62; degree of freedom = 1; probability = 0.4328). Fatigue performance of configuration 2 was one and a half times better than that of configuration 3. Group c3 had a better ultimate failure load (421.6 ± 12.5 N) than the other two settings i.e., c1 (324.5 ± 5.5 N) and c2 (396.3 ± 5.6) reaching almost a nonsignificant level. Conclusions: It was observed that a transmucosal implant design could provide the highest resistance to static fracture. On the other hand, an equicrestal implant design could increase dynamic endurance.
Highlights
In this in vitro study three different types of implant emergence profiles, such as one were small and standard diameter abuttransmucosal and two submerged bone level configurations, were investigated. These were ment/implant systems with a subcrestal straight cylindrical-shaped neck, and a standard small and standard diameter abutment/implant diameter one-piece cylindrical-shaped implant with a transmucosal convergent neck systems with a subcrestal straight cylindrical-shaped neck, and a standard diameter one(configuration 3c3)
The mean values of Ultimate Failure Loads (UFLs) and the bending moments of each of the three configurations can be seen in Table 1 and Figure 2
Since the one-piece cylindrical-shaped implant with a transmucosal convergent neck and hyperbolic hyperbolic geometry geometryand andthe theabutment/implant abutment/implant system with sub-crestal straight and system with sub-crestal straight cycylindrical-shaped neck showed significantly different behavior, the null hypothesis was lindrical-shaped neck showed significantly different behavior, the null hypothesis was rejected
Summary
Studies havedocumented the risks of impact fracture to dental implants and components [1,2]. Even if the adults were not prone to direct impact forces on their prostheses, the constant activity of biting and chewing, taken together, make fatigue fractures or deformations of the dental implants and related components much more likely [3]. The major problem clinicians face is that of a single implant-supported dental crown which hasscrew joint instability between the abutment/superstructure and the dental implant, and so, theincidence of mechanical failure increases [2,4]. Clinicians addressed minor mechanical failures, such as bending, loosening or the fracture of screws, abutment, or the entire prosthesis, by replacing or fixing them.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
