Qiu Piaopiao, Cao Rongkai, Dai Jiaxiu, Zhou Si, Yan Xiaoli, Fan Zhen
Graduate student, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Tooth Restoration and Regeneration & Tongji Research Institute of Stomatology & Department of Dental Implantation, Shanghai Tongji Stomatological Hospital and Dental School, Tongji University, Shanghai, PR China.
Assistant Professor, Laboratory of Immunology and Pathogen Biology, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, PR China.
J Prosthet Dent. 2025 Sep;134(3):763.e1-763.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.06.006. Epub 2025 Jun 27.
Implant-supported splinted prostheses have been widely used to rehabilitate partial edentulism. However, few studies have investigated how different abutment types affect stress distribution in dental implants and the surrounding bone structures of splinted crowns. In addition, which combination of abutments helps reduce microleakage at the abutment-implant interface the most is unclear.
The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of various implant abutment combinations for 2-unit implant-supported fixed prostheses on the implants and surrounding bone by using 3-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA) and to determine the microleakage of implants after fatigue testing.
A bone block representing the mandibular posterior region was created based on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) data. The implants used were bone-level with an internal conical connection and platform-switching design (Institut Straumann AG), which were positioned in the bone block with 4 distinct abutment (Institut Straumann AG) combinations: 2 screw-retained abutments restored with screw-retained crowns, 2 cement-retained abutments restored with cemented crowns, 2 Variobase for Bridge/Bar Cylindrical abutments, and a combination of a Variobase for a crown abutment and a Variobase for a Bridge/Bar Cylindrical abutment. A 2-unit crown for the mandibular right first molar and second premolar was designed with static and dynamic loads applied at a 30-degree angle to evaluate implant-abutment interface deformation. Fatigue testing with microleakage evaluation validated the FEA results. One-way ANOVA analyzed between-group differences, repeated-measures ANOVA evaluated microbiological data, and post hoc comparisons used the least significant difference (LSD) tests (α=.05).
The FEA results showed significant differences in implant-abutment interface displacement among the 4 groups, with the 2 screw-retained abutment group demonstrating the least displacement (P<.001). In vitro comparisons revealed significant differences (P<.001), where the 2 screw-retained abutment group exhibited the lowest OD values and the fewest contaminated samples.
Based on the FEA and fatigue testing results, the combination of 2 screw-retained abutments appears to provide the most favorable outcomes in terms of minimizing displacement and microleakage for 2-unit implant-supported fixed prostheses. Cement-retained abutments demonstrated the least favorable performance.
种植体支持的联冠修复体已广泛用于修复部分牙列缺损。然而,很少有研究调查不同基台类型如何影响种植体及联冠周围骨结构中的应力分布。此外,哪种基台组合能最大程度减少基台 - 种植体界面的微渗漏尚不清楚。
本研究的目的是通过三维有限元分析(FEA)评估各种种植体基台组合用于两单位种植体支持的固定修复体时对种植体及周围骨的影响,并在疲劳测试后确定种植体的微渗漏情况。
基于锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)数据创建代表下颌后牙区的骨块。所用种植体为骨水平型,具有内锥形连接和平台转换设计(士卓曼公司),在骨块中以4种不同的基台(士卓曼公司)组合定位:2个用螺丝固位冠修复的螺丝固位基台、2个用粘结冠修复的粘结固位基台、2个用于桥/杆的圆柱形可变基台,以及一个用于冠基台的可变基台和一个用于桥/杆的圆柱形可变基台的组合。设计一个用于下颌右第一磨牙和第二前磨牙的两单位冠,以30度角施加静态和动态载荷来评估种植体 - 基台界面变形。通过微渗漏评估的疲劳测试验证了FEA结果。单向方差分析分析组间差异,重复测量方差分析评估微生物学数据,事后比较使用最小显著差异(LSD)检验(α = 0.05)。
FEA结果显示4组之间种植体 - 基台界面位移存在显著差异,2个螺丝固位基台组的位移最小(P <.001)。体外比较显示存在显著差异(P <.001),其中2个螺丝固位基台组的OD值最低且污染样本最少。
基于FEA和疲劳测试结果,对于两单位种植体支持的固定修复体,2个螺丝固位基台的组合在最小化位移和微渗漏方面似乎能提供最有利的结果。粘结固位基台的性能最差。