Removal torque evaluation of three different abutment screws for single implant restorations after mechanical cyclic loading.

T. Paepoemsin, P. Reichart, P. Chaijareenont, F. Strietzel, P. Khongkhunthian
{"title":"Removal torque evaluation of three different abutment screws for single implant restorations after mechanical cyclic loading.","authors":"T. Paepoemsin, P. Reichart, P. Chaijareenont, F. Strietzel, P. Khongkhunthian","doi":"10.11138/orl/2016.9.4.213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\nThe aim of this study was to evaluate the removal torque of three different abutment screws and pull out strength of implant-abutment connection for single implant restorations after mechanical cyclic loading.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe study was performed in accordance with ISO 14801:2007. Three implant groups (n=15) were used: group A, PW Plus® with flat head screw; group B, PW Plus® with tapered screw; and group C, Conelog® with flat head screw. All groups had the same implant-abutment connection feature: cone with mandatory index. All screws were tightened with manufacturer's recommended torque. Ten specimens in each group underwent cyclic loading (1×106 cycles, 10 Hz, and 250 N). Then, all specimens were un-tightened, measured for the removal torque, and underwent a tensile test. The force that dislodged abutment from implant fixture was recorded. The data were analysed using independent sample t-test, ANOVA and Tukey HSD test.\n\n\nRESULTS\nBefore cyclic loading, removal torque in groups A, B and C were significantly different (B> A> C, P<.05). After cyclic loading, removal torque in all groups decreased significantly (P<.05). Group C revealed significantly less removal torque than groups A and B (P<.005). Tensile force in all groups significantly increased after cyclic loading (P<.05), group A had significantly less tensile force than groups B and C (P<.005).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nRemoval torque reduced significantly after cyclic loading. Before cyclic loading, tapered screws maintained more preload than did flat head screws. After cyclic loading, tapered and flat head screws maintained even amounts of preload. The tensile force that dislodged abutment from implant fixture increased immensely after cyclic loading.","PeriodicalId":38303,"journal":{"name":"ORAL and Implantology","volume":"19 1","pages":"213-221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ORAL and Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11138/orl/2016.9.4.213","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate the removal torque of three different abutment screws and pull out strength of implant-abutment connection for single implant restorations after mechanical cyclic loading. METHODS The study was performed in accordance with ISO 14801:2007. Three implant groups (n=15) were used: group A, PW Plus® with flat head screw; group B, PW Plus® with tapered screw; and group C, Conelog® with flat head screw. All groups had the same implant-abutment connection feature: cone with mandatory index. All screws were tightened with manufacturer's recommended torque. Ten specimens in each group underwent cyclic loading (1×106 cycles, 10 Hz, and 250 N). Then, all specimens were un-tightened, measured for the removal torque, and underwent a tensile test. The force that dislodged abutment from implant fixture was recorded. The data were analysed using independent sample t-test, ANOVA and Tukey HSD test. RESULTS Before cyclic loading, removal torque in groups A, B and C were significantly different (B> A> C, P<.05). After cyclic loading, removal torque in all groups decreased significantly (P<.05). Group C revealed significantly less removal torque than groups A and B (P<.005). Tensile force in all groups significantly increased after cyclic loading (P<.05), group A had significantly less tensile force than groups B and C (P<.005). CONCLUSIONS Removal torque reduced significantly after cyclic loading. Before cyclic loading, tapered screws maintained more preload than did flat head screws. After cyclic loading, tapered and flat head screws maintained even amounts of preload. The tensile force that dislodged abutment from implant fixture increased immensely after cyclic loading.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机械循环加载后单种植体修复中三种不同基牙螺钉的移除扭矩评估。
目的评价单种植体修复在机械循环载荷作用下,三种不同的基牙螺钉的移除扭矩和种植体-基牙连接的拔出强度。方法按照ISO 14801:2007标准进行研究。使用三组种植体(n=15): A组,PW Plus®扁头螺钉;B组为PW Plus®锥形螺杆;C组为Conelog®扁头螺钉。所有组均具有相同的种植体-基台连接特征:具有强制性指标的锥体。所有螺丝都按照制造商推荐的扭矩拧紧。每组10个试件进行循环加载(1×106 cycles, 10 Hz, 250 N),然后将所有试件解紧,测量去除扭矩,并进行拉伸试验。记录基台从种植体固定装置上位移的力。数据分析采用独立样本t检验、方差分析和Tukey HSD检验。结果循环加载前,A、B、C组的去除扭矩差异有统计学意义(B> A> C, P< 0.05)。循环加载后,各组去除扭矩均显著降低(P< 0.05)。C组脱毛力矩明显小于A、B组(P< 0.05)。循环加载后各组拉伸力均显著升高(P< 0.05), A组拉伸力显著低于B、C组(P< 0.005)。结论经循环加载后,去除扭矩明显减小。在循环加载前,锥形螺钉比平头螺钉保持更多的预紧力。循环加载后,锥形和平头螺钉保持均匀的预载荷量。循环加载后,基台与种植固定体之间的拉伸力明显增大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ORAL and Implantology
ORAL and Implantology Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Risk assessment of colonization of legionella spp. in dental unit waterlines. Clinical protocol with digital cad/cam chairside workflow for the rehabilitation of severely worn dentition patients. Correlations between dental malocclusions, ocular motility, and convergence disorders: a cross-sectional study in growing subjects. Obstructive site localization in patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome: a comparison between otolaryngologic data and cephalometric values. Prosthetic management of patients with oro-maxillo-facial defects: a long-term follow-up retrospective study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1