These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems.
    Author: Martínez-Rus F, Ferreiroa A, Özcan M, Bartolomé JF, Pradíes G.
    Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(6):1448-55. PubMed ID: 23189296.
    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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]