Santing Hendrik Jacob, Meijer Henny J A, Raghoebar Gerry M, Özcan Mutlu
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Dec;14(6):882-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00322.x. Epub 2010 Dec 22.
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) temporary abutments have been recently introduced for making implant-supported provisional single crowns. Little information is available in the dental literature on the durability of provisional implant-supported restorations.
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the fracture strength of implant-supported composite resin crowns on PEEK and solid titanium temporary abutments, and to analyze the failure types.
Three types of provisional abutments, RN synOcta Temporary Meso Abutment (PEEK; Straumann), RN synOcta Titanium Post for Temporary Restorations (Straumann), and Temporary Abutment Engaging NobRplRP (Nobel Biocare) were used, and provisional screw-retained crowns using composite resin (Solidex) were fabricated for four different locations in the maxilla. The specimens were tested in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute until fracture occurred. The failure types were analyzed and further categorized as irreparable (Type 1) or reparable (Type 2).
No significant difference was found between different abutment types. Only for the position of the maxillary central incisor, composite resin crowns on PEEK temporary abutments showed significantly lower (p < 0.05) fracture strength (95 ± 21 N) than those on titanium temporary abutments (1,009 ± 94 N). The most frequently experienced failure types were cohesive fractures of the composite resin crowns (75 out of 104), followed by screw loosening (18 out of 104). According to reparability, the majority of the specimens were classified as Type 1 (82 out of 104). Type 2 failures were not often observed (22 out of 104).
Provisional crowns on PEEK abutments showed similar fracture strength as titanium temporary abutments except for central incisors. Maxillary right central incisor composite resin crowns on PEEK temporary abutments fractured below the mean anterior masticatory loading forces reported to be approximately 206 N.
聚醚醚酮(PEEK)临时基台最近已被用于制作种植体支持的临时单冠。牙科文献中关于临时种植体支持修复体耐久性的信息很少。
本研究的目的是评估种植体支持的复合树脂冠在PEEK和实心钛临时基台上的断裂强度,并分析失败类型。
使用三种类型的临时基台,即RN synOcta临时中基台(PEEK;士卓曼)、RN synOcta用于临时修复的钛桩(士卓曼)和与NobRplRP配合的临时基台(诺贝尔生物公司),并在上颌四个不同位置制作使用复合树脂(Solidex)的临时螺丝固位冠。在万能试验机上以1毫米/分钟的十字头速度对标本进行测试,直至发生断裂。分析失败类型并进一步分为不可修复(1型)或可修复(2型)。
不同基台类型之间未发现显著差异。仅在上颌中切牙位置,PEEK临时基台上的复合树脂冠的断裂强度(95±21 N)明显低于钛临时基台上的复合树脂冠(1009±9 N)。最常见的失败类型是复合树脂冠的粘结性断裂(104例中有75例),其次是螺丝松动(104例中有18例)。根据可修复性,大多数标本被归类为1型(104例中有82例)。2型失败不常观察到(104例中有22例)。
除中切牙外,PEEK基台上的临时冠与钛临时基台具有相似的断裂强度。PEEK临时基台上的上颌右中切牙复合树脂冠在低于据报道约为206 N的平均前牙咀嚼负荷力下发生断裂。