Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the internal and vertical marginal fit of metallic copings to abutments and the fracture strength of different narrow diameter dental implant/abutments, either submitted to thermomechanical cycling or not. Sixty-four implant/abutments (n=16) were divided into 4 groups according to diameter and abutment type: G3.5-UAC (morse taper implant Ø3.5mm + universal abutment with beveled chamfer finish); G2.9-UAS (morse taper implant Ø2.9mm + universal abutment with shoulder finish); G2.8-AA (morse taper friction implant Ø2.8mm + anatomical abutment) and G2.5-HP (one-piece implant Ø2.5mm with indexed hexagonal platform). Each group was divided into two subgroups (n=8): submitted and not submitted to thermomechanical cycling (TMC). To assess internal and vertical marginal fit of metallic copings, the assemblies were scanned using microtomography (micro-CT) (n=5). The samples were subjected to the compressive strength test on a universal test machine. Group G3.5-UAC showed the highest marginal misfit regardless of TMC (p<0.05). All other groups were similar after TMC. Group G2.8-AA showed the lowest internal misfit both with and without TMC (p<0.05). Group G2.8-AA showed the highest fracture strength, similar only to G2.5-HP without TMC and G3.5-UAC with TMC. The type of abutment affects the internal and marginal fit of metallic copings and the anatomical abutment led to the best internal and marginal coping fit. The narrow diameter dental implant/abutments differ in terms of fracture strength, the strongest assembly was that composed by implant of type V grade titanium without internal threads (friction implant).
Highlights
Narrow-diameter implants have become a common choice in Dentistry because they can be used as an alternative for rehabilitation of areas with significant bone resorption after dental extraction, regions with bone loss following periodontal disease, trauma or dental agenesis, reduced mesiodistal prosthetic space, or limited interradicular space [1]
This study aimed to assess internal and vertical marginal fit of metal copings cemented on different abutments and the fracture strength of the implant/abutment narrowdiameter implant assemblies
G2.5-HP showed a higher misfit than G2.9-UAS and G2.8-AA
Summary
Narrow-diameter implants have become a common choice in Dentistry because they can be used as an alternative for rehabilitation of areas with significant bone resorption after dental extraction, regions with bone loss following periodontal disease, trauma or dental agenesis, reduced mesiodistal prosthetic space, or limited interradicular space [1]. Narrow-diameter implants can avoid the use of bone grafts, leading to reduced treatment time, cost, and morbidity [1]. Narrow-diameter implants have a small surface area, with reduced bone-implant contact. This could affect the stress distribution on the bone, potentially compromising the osseointegration [4,5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
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 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.
