nach oben

Clinical Oral Investigations

Erschienen in:

01.03.2018 | Original Article

Mechanical performance of cement– and screw–retained all–ceramic single crowns on dental implants

verfasst von: Matthias Obermeier, Oliver Ristow, Kurt Erdelt, Florian Beuer

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 2/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

This in-vitro study was performed to compare the contact wear, fracture strength and failure mode of implant-supported all-ceramic single crowns manufactured with various fabrication and fixation concepts.

Materials and methods

Fifty dental implants (Conelog Ø 4,3mm/L11mm, Camlog Biotechnologies AG) were embedded and treated with all-ceramic molar single-crowns. Three groups received hand-layered zirconia crowns (IPS e.max Ceram/ IPS e.max ZirCAD, Ivoclar Vivadent AG): CZL (cement-retained zirconia-based layered) group crowns were cemented conventionally, SZL (screw-retained zirconia-based layered) group crowns were screw-retained, MZL (modified zirconia-based layered) group crowns showed a different coping design with screw retention. The specimens of SST (screw-retained sintering-technique) and SFL (screw-retained full-contour lithium-disilicate) group were CAD/CAM (Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) fabricated in the sintering technique (IPS e.max ZirCAD/IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent AG) and full-contour of lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent AG) respectively and screw-retained. All specimens underwent artificial aging, load until failure and a scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis. The received data were statistically compared (one-way ANOVA; Student-Newman-Keuls test; Mann-Whitney U-test) at a significance level of 5%.

Results

Mouth-motion fatigue testing caused two abutment fractures (SST group and SZL group) and two chipping events (CZL group). Specimens of MZL group showed statistically significant less contact wear compared to the other groups (p<0.001). There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of the maximum fracture load. SEM-analysis showed a more homogenous structure and surface of CAD/CAM fabricated specimens towards manually veneered components.

Conclusions

The mode of retention did not influence the fracture resistance but the failure patterns of the specimens. CAD/CAM milled lithium-disilicate crowns seemed to be a preserving factor for dental implants.

Clinical relevance

The mode of retention and veneering influences the mechanical performance of implant-supported single crowns.

Roediger M, Gersdorff N, Huels A, Rinke S (2010) Prospective evaluation of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: four-year clinical results. Int J Prosthodont 23(2):141–148PubMed

Raigrodski AJ, Hillstead MB, Meng GK, Chung KH (2012) Survival and complications of zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 107(3):170–177. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60051-1 CrossRefPubMed

Sorrentino R, De Simone G, Tete S, Russo S, Zarone F (2012) Five-year prospective clinical study of posterior three-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Investig 16(3):977–985. doi:10.1007/s00784-011-0575-2 CrossRefPubMed

Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Luthy H, Hammerle CH (2007) Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 20(4):383–388PubMed

Pjetursson BE, Bragger U, Lang NP, Zwahlen M (2007) Comparison of survival and complication rates of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant-supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs). Clin Oral Implants Res 18(Suppl 3):97–113. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01439.x CrossRefPubMed

Sailer I, Muhlemann S, Zwahlen M, Hammerle CH, Schneider D (2012) Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(Suppl 6):163–201. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02538.x CrossRefPubMed

Linkevicius T, Vindasiute E, Puisys A, Peciuliene V (2011) The influence of margin location on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res 22(12):1379–1384. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02119.x CrossRefPubMed

Wilson TG Jr (2009) The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol 80(9):1388–1392. doi:10.1902/jop.2009.090115 CrossRefPubMed

Karl M, Graef F, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM (2007) In vitro effect of load cycling on metal-ceramic cement- and screw-retained implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent 97(3):137–140. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2007.01.001 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Torrado E, Ercoli C, Al Mardini M, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L (2004) A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 91(6):532–537. doi:10.1016/S0022391304001398 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Beuer F, Schweiger J, Eichberger M, Kappert HF, Gernet W, Edelhoff D (2009) High-strength CAD/CAM-fabricated veneering material sintered to zirconia copings--a new fabrication mode for all-ceramic restorations. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 25(1):121–128. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.04.019 CrossRef

12.

Lin WS, Ercoli C, Feng C, Morton D (2012) The effect of core material, veneering porcelain, and fabrication technique on the biaxial flexural strength and weibull analysis of selected dental ceramics. Journal of prosthodontics: official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists 21(5):353–362. doi:10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00845.x CrossRef

13.

Schmitter M, Mueller D, Rues S (2012) Chipping behaviour of all-ceramic crowns with zirconia framework and CAD/CAM manufactured veneer. J Dent 40(2):154–162. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2011.12.007 CrossRefPubMed

14.

de Kok P, Kleverlaan CJ, de Jager N, Kuijs R, Feilzer AJ (2015) Mechanical performance of implant-supported posterior crowns. J Prosthet Dent 114(1):59–66. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.10.015 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Rinke S, Gersdorff N, Lange K, Roediger M (2013) Prospective evaluation of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 7-year clinical results. The international journal of prosthodontics 26 (2):164-171. Doi:10.11607/ijp.3229

16.

Baldissara P, Llukacej A, Ciocca L, Valandro FL, Scotti R (2010) Translucency of zirconia copings made with different CAD/CAM systems. J Prosthet Dent 104(1):6–12. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60086-8 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Reich S, Schierz O (2013) Chair-side generated posterior lithium disilicate crowns after 4 years. Clin Oral Investig 17(7):1765–1772. doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0868-0 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Schwarz S, Schroder C, Hassel A, Bomicke W, Rammelsberg P (2012) Survival and chipping of zirconia-based and metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14(Suppl 1):e119–e125. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00388.x CrossRefPubMed

19.

Eisenburger M, Mache T, Borchers L, Stiesch M (2011) Fracture stability of anterior zirconia crowns with different core designs and veneered using the layering or the press-over technique. Eur J Oral Sci 119(3):253–257. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0722.2011.00829.x CrossRefPubMed

20.

Harder S, Kern M (2009) Survival and complications of computer aided-designing and computer-aided manufacturing vs. conventionally fabricated implant-supported reconstructions: a systematic review. Clinical oral implants research 20 Suppl 4:48-54. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01778.x

21.

Hebel KS, Gajjar RC (1997) Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 77(1):28–35CrossRefPubMed

22.

Chee W, Jivraj S (2006) Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations. Br Dent J 201(8):501–507. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.4814157 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G (2004) Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19(2):260–265PubMed

24.

Wittneben JG, Buser D, Salvi GE, Burgin W, Hicklin S, Bragger U (2013) Complication and failure rates with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and single crowns: a 10-year retrospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. doi:10.1111/cid.12066

25.

Randelzhofer P, Cacaci C (2011) Verschraubte Lösung. Teamwork J CONT DENT EDUC, vol 3/2011

26.

Heintze SD, Cavalleri A, Zellweger G, Buchler A, Zappini G (2008) Fracture frequency of all-ceramic crowns during dynamic loading in a chewing simulator using different loading and luting protocols. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 24(10):1352–1361. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.02.019 CrossRef

27.

Stappert CF, Att W, Gerds T, Strub JR (2006) Fracture resistance of different partial-coverage ceramic molar restorations: an in vitro investigation. J Am Dent Assoc 137(4):514–522CrossRefPubMed

28.

Schmitter M, Mueller D, Rues S (2013) In vitro chipping behaviour of all-ceramic crowns with a zirconia framework and feldspathic veneering: comparison of CAD/CAM-produced veneer with manually layered veneer. J Oral Rehabil 40(7):519–525. doi:10.1111/joor.12061 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Jung RE, Pjetursson BE, Glauser R, Zembic A, Zwahlen M, Lang NP (2008) A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res 19(2):119–130. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01453.x CrossRefPubMed

30.

Jung RE, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, Zwahlen M, Thoma DS (2012) Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(Suppl 6):2–21. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02547.x CrossRefPubMed

31.

Sailer I, Philipp A, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, Hammerle CH, Zwahlen M (2009) A systematic review of the performance of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clin Oral Implants Res 20(Suppl 4):4–31. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01787.x CrossRefPubMed

32.

Yildirim M, Fischer H, Marx R, Edelhoff D (2003) In vivo fracture resistance of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 90(4):325–331. doi:10.1016/S0022391303005146 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Zarone F, Sorrentino R, Traini T, Di lorio D, Caputi S (2007) Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw- versus cement-retained porcelain fused to metal single crowns: SEM fractographic analysis. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 23 (3):296–301. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2005.10.013

34.

Att W, Kurun S, Gerds T, Strub JR (2006) Fracture resistance of single-tooth implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 95(2):111–116. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.12.003 CrossRefPubMed

35.

Stimmelmayr M, Sagerer S, Erdelt K, Beuer F (2013) In vitro fatigue and fracture strength testing of one-piece zirconia implant abutments and zirconia implant abutments connected to titanium cores. The international journal of oral & maxillofacial implants 28 (2):488-493. Doi:10.11607/jomi.2772

36.

Komine F, Taguchi K, Fushiki R, Kamio S, Iwasaki T, Matsumura H (2014) In vitro comparison of fracture load of implant-supported, zirconia-based, porcelain- and composite-layered restorations after artificial aging. Dent Mater J 33(5):607–613CrossRefPubMed

37.

Rosentritt M, Hahnel S, Engelhardt F, Behr M, Preis V (2017) In vitro performance and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM-fabricated implant supported molar crowns. Clin Oral Investig 21(4):1213–1219. doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1898-9 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Sornsuwan T, Ellakwa A, Swain MV (2011) Occlusal geometrical considerations in all-ceramic pre-molar crown failure testing. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 27(11):1127–1134. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.08.005 CrossRef

39.

Kamio S, Komine F, Taguchi K, Iwasaki T, Blatz MB, Matsumura H (2015) Effects of framework design and layering material on fracture strength of implant-supported zirconia-based molar crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(12):1407–1413. doi:10.1111/clr.12468 CrossRefPubMed

40.

Nissan J, Narobai D, Gross O, Ghelfan O, Chaushu G (2011) Long-term outcome of cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported partial restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26(5):1102–1107PubMed

41.

Preis V, Hahnel S, Behr M, Bein L, Rosentritt M (2017) In-vitro fatigue and fracture testing of CAD/CAM-materials in implant-supported molar crowns. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 33(4):427–433. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2017.01.003 CrossRef

42.

Cacaci C, Cantner F, Mucke T, Randelzhofer P, Hajto J, Beuer F (2016) Clinical performance of screw-retained and cemented implant-supported zirconia single crowns: 36-month results. Clin Oral Investig. doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1982-1

43.

Millen CS, Reuben RL, Ibbetson RJ (2012) The effect of coping/veneer thickness on the fracture toughness and residual stress of implant supported, cement retained zirconia and metal-ceramic crowns. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 28(10):e250–e258. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2012.06.008 CrossRef

44.

Shirakura A, Lee H, Geminiani A, Ercoli C, Feng C (2009) The influence of veneering porcelain thickness of all-ceramic and metal ceramic crowns on failure resistance after cyclic loading. J Prosthet Dent 101(2):119–127. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60006-8 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Korsch M, Obst U, Walther W (2014) Cement-associated peri-implantitis: a retrospective clinical observational study of fixed implant-supported restorations using a methacrylate cement. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(7):797–802. doi:10.1111/clr.12173 CrossRefPubMed

46.

Korsch M, Robra BP, Walther W (2015) Cement-associated signs of inflammation: retrospective analysis of the effect of excess cement on peri-implant tissue. The international journal of prosthodontics 28 (1):11-18. Doi:10.11607/ijp.4043

47.

Korsch M, Walther W (2014) Peri-Implantitis associated with type of cement: a retrospective analysis of different types of cement and their clinical correlation to the Peri-implant tissue. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. doi:10.1111/cid.12265

48.

Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Gueth JF, Edelhoff D, Naumann M (2012) In vitro performance of full-contour zirconia single crowns. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 28(4):449–456. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.024 CrossRef

49.

Silva NR, Thompson VP, Valverde GB, Coelho PG, Powers JM, Farah JW, Esquivel-Upshaw J (2011) Comparative reliability analyses of zirconium oxide and lithium disilicate restorations in vitro and in vivo. J Am Dent Assoc 142(Suppl 2):4S–9SCrossRefPubMed

50.

Ivoclar-Vivadent (2011) IPS e.max CAD-on - Scientific Documentation

51.

Ivoclar-Vivadent (2005) IPS e.max Ceram-Scientific Documentation

52.

Guess PC, Zavanelli RA, Silva NR, Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Thompson VP (2010) Monolithic CAD/CAM lithium disilicate versus veneered Y-TZP crowns: comparison of failure modes and reliability after fatigue. Int J Prosthodont 23(5):434–442PubMed

53.

Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Gernet W, Edelhoff D, Guh JF, Naumann M (2010) Prospective study of zirconia-based restorations: 3-year clinical results. Quintessence Int 41(8):631–637PubMed

Titel: Mechanical performance of cement– and screw–retained all–ceramic single crowns on dental implants
verfasst von: Matthias Obermeier
Oliver Ristow
Kurt Erdelt
Florian Beuer
Publikationsdatum: 01.03.2018
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2178-z

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Mechanical performance of cement– and screw–retained all–ceramic single crowns on dental implants

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2018

Biomarker levels in gingival crevicular fluid of generalized aggressive periodontitis patients after non-surgical periodontal treatment

Volatile organic compounds in the breath of oral candidiasis patients: a pilot study

The effects of a desiccant agent in the treatment of chronic periodontitis: a randomized, controlled clinical trial

Trigemino-gustatory interactions: a randomized controlled clinical trial assessing the effects of selective anesthesia of dental afferents on taste thresholds

Influence of radiotherapy on the dentin properties and bond strength

Expression of small leucine-rich extracellular matrix proteoglycans biglycan and lumican reveals oral lichen planus malignant potential

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter