Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012 Nov-Dec; 27(6):1448-55.IJ

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the fracture resistance of all-ceramic crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Customized implant abutments for maxillary right central incisors made of titanium (Ti) and zirconia (Zr) (n=60, n=30 per group) were fabricated for an internal connection implant system. All-ceramic crowns were fabricated for their corresponding implant abutments using the following systems (n=10 per group): (1) monolithic computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) lithium disilicate (MLD); (2) pressed lithium disilicate (PLD); (3) yttrium stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (YTZP). The frameworks of both PLD and YTZP systems were manually veneered with a fluorapatite-based ceramic. The crowns were adhesively cemented to their implant abutments and loaded to fracture in a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/minute). Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Both the abutment material (P=.0001) and the ceramic crown system (P=.028) significantly affected the results. Interaction terms were not significant (P=.598). Ti-MLD (558.5±35 N) showed the highest mean fracture resistance among all abutment-crown combinations (340.3±62-495.9±53 N) (P<.05). Both MLD and veneered ceramic systems in combination with Ti abutments (558.5±35-495.9±53 N) presented significantly higher values than with Zr abutments (392.9±55-340.3±62 N) (P<.05). MLD crown system showed significantly higher mean fracture resistance compared to manually veneered ones on both Ti and Zr abutments (P<.05). While Ti-MLD and Ti-PLD abutment-crown combinations failed only in the crowns without abutment fractures, Zr-YTZP combination failed exclusively in the abutment without crown fracture. Zr-MLD and Zr-PLD failed predominantly in both the abutment and the crown. Ti-YTZP showed only implant neck distortion.

CONCLUSIONS

The highest fracture resistance was obtained with titanium abutments restored with MLD crowns, but the failure type was more favorable with Ti-YTZP combination.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Martínez-Rus F
Department of Buccofacial Prosthesis, Faculty of Odontology, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Ferreiroa A
No affiliation info available
Özcan M
No affiliation info available
Bartolomé JF
No affiliation info available
Pradíes G
No affiliation info available

MeSH

Analysis of VarianceCeramicsComputer-Aided DesignCrownsDental Implant-Abutment DesignDental PorcelainDental Restoration FailureDental Stress AnalysisHumansIncisorMaxillaTitaniumYttriumZirconium

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

23189296

Citation

Martínez-Rus, Francisco, et al. "Fracture Resistance of Crowns Cemented On Titanium and Zirconia Implant Abutments: a Comparison of Monolithic Versus Manually Veneered All-ceramic Systems." The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, vol. 27, no. 6, 2012, pp. 1448-55.
Martínez-Rus F, Ferreiroa A, Özcan M, et al. Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27(6):1448-55.
Martínez-Rus, F., Ferreiroa, A., Özcan, M., Bartolomé, J. F., & Pradíes, G. (2012). Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 27(6), 1448-55.
Martínez-Rus F, et al. Fracture Resistance of Crowns Cemented On Titanium and Zirconia Implant Abutments: a Comparison of Monolithic Versus Manually Veneered All-ceramic Systems. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012 Nov-Dec;27(6):1448-55. PubMed PMID: 23189296.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems. AU - Martínez-Rus,Francisco, AU - Ferreiroa,Alberto, AU - Özcan,Mutlu, AU - Bartolomé,José F, AU - Pradíes,Guillermo, PY - 2012/11/29/entrez PY - 2012/11/29/pubmed PY - 2013/7/19/medline SP - 1448 EP - 55 JF - The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants JO - Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants VL - 27 IS - 6 N2 - PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture resistance of all-ceramic crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Customized implant abutments for maxillary right central incisors made of titanium (Ti) and zirconia (Zr) (n=60, n=30 per group) were fabricated for an internal connection implant system. All-ceramic crowns were fabricated for their corresponding implant abutments using the following systems (n=10 per group): (1) monolithic computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) lithium disilicate (MLD); (2) pressed lithium disilicate (PLD); (3) yttrium stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (YTZP). The frameworks of both PLD and YTZP systems were manually veneered with a fluorapatite-based ceramic. The crowns were adhesively cemented to their implant abutments and loaded to fracture in a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/minute). Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (α=0.05). RESULTS: Both the abutment material (P=.0001) and the ceramic crown system (P=.028) significantly affected the results. Interaction terms were not significant (P=.598). Ti-MLD (558.5±35 N) showed the highest mean fracture resistance among all abutment-crown combinations (340.3±62-495.9±53 N) (P<.05). Both MLD and veneered ceramic systems in combination with Ti abutments (558.5±35-495.9±53 N) presented significantly higher values than with Zr abutments (392.9±55-340.3±62 N) (P<.05). MLD crown system showed significantly higher mean fracture resistance compared to manually veneered ones on both Ti and Zr abutments (P<.05). While Ti-MLD and Ti-PLD abutment-crown combinations failed only in the crowns without abutment fractures, Zr-YTZP combination failed exclusively in the abutment without crown fracture. Zr-MLD and Zr-PLD failed predominantly in both the abutment and the crown. Ti-YTZP showed only implant neck distortion. CONCLUSIONS: The highest fracture resistance was obtained with titanium abutments restored with MLD crowns, but the failure type was more favorable with Ti-YTZP combination. SN - 1942-4434 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/23189296/Fracture_resistance_of_crowns_cemented_on_titanium_and_zirconia_implant_abutments:_a_comparison_of_monolithic_versus_manually_veneered_all_ceramic_systems_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -