{"title":"去除基牙螺钉和模拟循环负荷后四个锥形种植体基牙连接的存活:体外比较研究。","authors":"Kuang-Ta Yao, Tsai-Yu Chang, Guan-Jhong Huang, Hsu-Wei Fang, Ding-Han Wang, Ming-Lun Hsu","doi":"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This in vitro study evaluated the mechanical behavior of different conical connection implant systems after abutment screw withdrawal. Four conical connection systems were selected based on different conical half-angles: Ankylos (5.7°), Cowell (7.0°), Straumann (7.5°), and Astra (11.0°). In each system, 5 implants and abutments were used (n = 5). According to the recommended value, each abutment screw was torqued to settle the abutment and then withdrawn through a predesigned hole of the cemented crown. The retentiveness of the abutment was evaluated by the following mechanical testing. All specimens were subjected to cyclic loading of 20-200 N, 30°, and 4-mm off-axis to the implant axis, for 106 cycles. The pullout forces and axial displacements of the abutments were measured. The data of the Cowell system was obtained from our previous work. All groups other than Astra group, in which abutment loosened after abutment screw withdrawal, passed the cyclic loading test. Straumann group demonstrated a significantly lower pullout force (27.4 ± 21.1 N) than Ankylos (160.1 ± 41.4 N) and Cowell (183.7 ± 30.5 N) groups. All groups showed abutment rebound after screw withdrawal except Straumann group. In addition, Ankylos, Cowell, and Straumann groups demonstrated axial displacement after cyclic loading. In terms of the retentiveness of the abutment after abutment screw withdrawal examined in this study, Ankylos and Cowell groups had much higher retentiveness than Straumann group, while Astra group had none. Conical angle could be a key design parameter to make abutment screw withdrawal after conical abutment settlement feasible, but more studies must be conducted for clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":50101,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Implantology","volume":"49 4","pages":"393-400"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival of Four Conical Implant Abutment Connections After Removal of the Abutment Screw and Simulated Cyclic Loading: An In Vitro Comparative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Kuang-Ta Yao, Tsai-Yu Chang, Guan-Jhong Huang, Hsu-Wei Fang, Ding-Han Wang, Ming-Lun Hsu\",\"doi\":\"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This in vitro study evaluated the mechanical behavior of different conical connection implant systems after abutment screw withdrawal. Four conical connection systems were selected based on different conical half-angles: Ankylos (5.7°), Cowell (7.0°), Straumann (7.5°), and Astra (11.0°). In each system, 5 implants and abutments were used (n = 5). According to the recommended value, each abutment screw was torqued to settle the abutment and then withdrawn through a predesigned hole of the cemented crown. The retentiveness of the abutment was evaluated by the following mechanical testing. All specimens were subjected to cyclic loading of 20-200 N, 30°, and 4-mm off-axis to the implant axis, for 106 cycles. The pullout forces and axial displacements of the abutments were measured. The data of the Cowell system was obtained from our previous work. All groups other than Astra group, in which abutment loosened after abutment screw withdrawal, passed the cyclic loading test. Straumann group demonstrated a significantly lower pullout force (27.4 ± 21.1 N) than Ankylos (160.1 ± 41.4 N) and Cowell (183.7 ± 30.5 N) groups. All groups showed abutment rebound after screw withdrawal except Straumann group. In addition, Ankylos, Cowell, and Straumann groups demonstrated axial displacement after cyclic loading. In terms of the retentiveness of the abutment after abutment screw withdrawal examined in this study, Ankylos and Cowell groups had much higher retentiveness than Straumann group, while Astra group had none. Conical angle could be a key design parameter to make abutment screw withdrawal after conical abutment settlement feasible, but more studies must be conducted for clinical application.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50101,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral Implantology\",\"volume\":\"49 4\",\"pages\":\"393-400\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral Implantology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00037\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00037","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这项体外研究评估了不同锥形连接种植体系统在基牙螺钉拔出后的力学行为。根据不同的锥形半角选择了四种锥形连接系统:Ankylos(5.7°)、Cowell(7.0°)、Straumann(7.5°)和Astra(11.0°)。在每个系统中,使用5个种植体和基牙(n = 5)。根据推荐值,将每个基牙螺钉旋转以固定基牙,然后通过预先设计的骨水泥冠孔取出。通过以下力学测试评估基台的固位力。所有标本均接受20-200 N, 30°,距种植体轴4 mm的循环加载,循环106次。测量了支台的拉拔力和轴向位移。Cowell系统的数据是从我们以前的工作中得到的。除Astra组脱螺后基台松动外,其余各组均通过循环加载试验。Straumann组的拔出力(27.4±21.1 N)明显低于Ankylos组(160.1±41.4 N)和Cowell组(183.7±30.5 N)。除Straumann组外,其余各组均出现脱钉后基台反弹。此外,Ankylos, Cowell和Straumann组在循环加载后表现出轴向位移。在本研究中检查的基台螺钉取出后的固位力方面,Ankylos组和Cowell组的固位力明显高于Straumann组,而Astra组则没有。锥度角可以作为锥度基台沉降后螺钉拔出可行的关键设计参数,但临床应用还需进一步研究。
Survival of Four Conical Implant Abutment Connections After Removal of the Abutment Screw and Simulated Cyclic Loading: An In Vitro Comparative Study.
This in vitro study evaluated the mechanical behavior of different conical connection implant systems after abutment screw withdrawal. Four conical connection systems were selected based on different conical half-angles: Ankylos (5.7°), Cowell (7.0°), Straumann (7.5°), and Astra (11.0°). In each system, 5 implants and abutments were used (n = 5). According to the recommended value, each abutment screw was torqued to settle the abutment and then withdrawn through a predesigned hole of the cemented crown. The retentiveness of the abutment was evaluated by the following mechanical testing. All specimens were subjected to cyclic loading of 20-200 N, 30°, and 4-mm off-axis to the implant axis, for 106 cycles. The pullout forces and axial displacements of the abutments were measured. The data of the Cowell system was obtained from our previous work. All groups other than Astra group, in which abutment loosened after abutment screw withdrawal, passed the cyclic loading test. Straumann group demonstrated a significantly lower pullout force (27.4 ± 21.1 N) than Ankylos (160.1 ± 41.4 N) and Cowell (183.7 ± 30.5 N) groups. All groups showed abutment rebound after screw withdrawal except Straumann group. In addition, Ankylos, Cowell, and Straumann groups demonstrated axial displacement after cyclic loading. In terms of the retentiveness of the abutment after abutment screw withdrawal examined in this study, Ankylos and Cowell groups had much higher retentiveness than Straumann group, while Astra group had none. Conical angle could be a key design parameter to make abutment screw withdrawal after conical abutment settlement feasible, but more studies must be conducted for clinical application.
期刊介绍:
The official publication of the American Academy of Implant Dentistry and of the American Academy of Implant Prosthodontics, is dedicated to providing valuable information to general dentists, oral surgeons, prosthodontists, periodontists, scientists, clinicians, laboratory owners and technicians, manufacturers, and educators. Implant basics, prosthetics, pharmaceuticals, the latest research in implantology, implant surgery, and advanced implant procedures are just some of the topics covered.