Yilmaz Burak, Salaita Louai G, Seidt Jeremy D, McGlumphy Edwin A, Clelland Nancy L
Associate Professor, Division of Restorative and Prosthetic Dentistry, The Ohio State University College of Dentistry, Columbus, Ohio.
Private practice, Columbus, Ohio.
J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Sep;114(3):373-7. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.03.015. Epub 2015 May 12.
Various zirconia abutment designs are available to restore implant systems. Fracture resistance is one of the criteria involved in selecting among these options.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure and compare load to failure for 5 zirconia abutments for an internally hexagon implant.
Five 4.1×11.5-mm Zimmer tapered screw-vent implants were individually secured in a loading apparatus, and 3 specimens of each of the 5 different abutments (Zimmer Contour with a Ti ring, anatomic-contour Atlantis-Zr, anatomic-contour Inclusive-Zr, anatomic-contour Astra Tech ZirDesign, Legacy Straight Contoured abutment with Ti core) (N=15) were loaded at a 30-degree angle until the implant abutment complex failed. Data for load to failure were compared with analysis of variance and a Tukey-Kramer post hoc test (α=.05).
The custom anatomic-contour abutment (Inclusive) showed the lowest load to fracture, and the stock anatomic-contour (AstraTech ZirDesign) the second lowest load to fracture. These were significantly lower than all other abutments (P<.05). The highest overall fracture strength was of a zirconia abutment with a titanium core-hexagon (Legacy Straight Contoured), which was significantly greater than all other abutments (P<.05). Anatomic-contour zirconia abutments fractured at an average of 275 N compared with the average fracture load of 842 N for zirconia abutments with titanium component (P<.05).
The stock zirconia abutment with a titanium ring and the zirconia abutment with a titanium core-hexagon (Legacy Straight Contoured) had significantly greater fracture resistance than that of any of the 1-piece anatomic-contour zirconia abutments tested.
有多种氧化锆基台设计可用于修复种植系统。抗折性是在这些选项中进行选择时所涉及的标准之一。
本体外研究的目的是测量并比较5种用于内六角种植体的氧化锆基台的破坏载荷。
将5个4.1×11.5毫米的Zimmer锥形螺纹孔种植体分别固定在加载装置中，对5种不同基台（带钛环的Zimmer Contour、解剖型Atlantis-Zr、解剖型Inclusive-Zr、解剖型Astra Tech ZirDesign、带钛芯的传统直形轮廓基台）各3个样本（N = 15）以30度角加载，直至种植体-基台复合体失效。采用方差分析和Tukey-Kramer事后检验（α = 0.05）比较破坏载荷数据。
定制的解剖型轮廓基台（Inclusive）显示出最低的断裂载荷，而标准解剖型轮廓基台（AstraTech ZirDesign）的断裂载荷次之。这些显著低于所有其他基台（P < 0.05）。总体抗折强度最高的是带钛芯-六角形的氧化锆基台（传统直形轮廓），其显著高于所有其他基台（P < 0.05）。解剖型轮廓氧化锆基台的平均断裂载荷为275 N，而带钛部件的氧化锆基台的平均断裂载荷为842 N（P < 0.05）。
带钛环的标准氧化锆基台和带钛芯-六角形的氧化锆基台（传统直形轮廓）的抗折性显著高于所测试的任何一种一体式解剖型轮廓氧化锆基台。
