Effect of Fabrication Technique on the Microgap of CAD/CAM Cobalt–Chrome and Zirconia Abutments on a Conical Connection Implant: An In Vitro Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Specimen Preparation
2.3. Abutment Fabrication
2.4. Aging Processess
2.5. Microgap Definition and Assessment
2.6. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hjalmarsson, L.; Gheisarifar, M.; Jemt, T. A systematic review of survival of single implants as presented in longitudinal studies with a follow-up of at least 10 years. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 2016, 9, S155–S162. [Google Scholar]
- Pjetursson, B.E.; Valente, N.A.; Strasding, M.; Zwahlen, M.; Liu, S.; Sailer, I. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic single crowns. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2018, 29, 199–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Jung, R.E.; Zembic, A.; Pjetursson, B.E.; Zwahlen, M.; Thoma, D.S. 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. 2012, 23, 2–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sailer, I.; Sailer, T.; Stawarczyk, B.; Jung, R.E.; Hämmerle, C.H. In vitro study of the influence of the type of connection on the fracture load of zirconia abutments with internal and external implant-abutment connections. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 2009, 24, 850–858. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Katsoulis, J.; Takeichi, T.; Gaviria, A.S.; Peter, L.; Katsoulis, K. Misfit of implant prostheses and its impact on clinical out-comes. Definition, assessment and a systematic review of the literature. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 2017, 10, 121–138. [Google Scholar]
- Koutouzis, T. Implant-abutment connection as contributing factor to peri-implant diseases. Periodontology 2019, 81, 152–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, Y.; Wang, J. Influences of microgap and micromotion of implant–abutment interface on marginal bone loss around implant neck. Arch. Oral Biol. 2017, 83, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caricasulo, R.; Malchiodi, L.; Ghensi, P.; Fantozzi, G.; Cucchi, A. The influence of implant-abutment connection to peri-implant bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 2018, 20, 653–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- King, G.N.; Hermann, J.S.; Schoolfield, J.D.; Buser, D.; Cochran, D.L. Influence of the Size of the Microgap on Crestal Bone Levels in Non-Submerged Dental Implants: A Radiographic Study in the Canine Mandible. J. Periodontol. 2002, 73, 1111–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abou-Ayash, S.; Strasding, M.; Rücker, G.; Att, W. Impact of prosthetic material on mid- and long-term outcome of dental implants supporting single crowns and fixed partial dentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J. Oral Implantol. 2017, 10, 47–65. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, K.-B.; Kim, J.-H.; Kim, W.-C.; Kim, J.-H. Three-dimensional evaluation of gaps associated with fixed dental prostheses fabricated with new technologies. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2014, 112, 1432–1436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abdelhamed, M.I.; Galley, J.D.; Bailey, M.T.; Johnston, W.M.; Holloway, J.; McGlumphy, E.; Leblebicioglu, B. A Comparison of Zirconia and Titanium Abutments for Microleakage. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 2015, 17, e643–e651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schmitt, C.M.; Nogueira-Filho, G.; Tenenbaum, H.C.; Lai, J.Y.; Brito, C.; Döring, H.; Nonhoff, J. Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: A systematic review. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A 2014, 102, 552–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canullo, L.; Penarrocha-Oltra, D.; Soldini, C.; Mazzocco, F.; Peñarrocha, M.; Covani, U. Microbiological assessment of the implant-abutment interface in different connections: Cross-sectional study after 5 years of functional loading. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2015, 26, 426–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hamilton, A.; Judge, R.B.; Palamara, J.E.; Evans, C. Evaluation of the Fit of CAD/CAM Abutments. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2013, 26, 370–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Edelhoff, D.; Schweiger, J.; Prandtner, O.; Stimmelmayr, M.; Güth, J.-F. Metal-free implant-supported single-tooth restorations. Part I: Abutments and cemented crowns. Quintessence Int. 2019, 50, 176–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edelhoff, D.; Schweiger, J.; Prandtner, O.; Stimmelmayr, M.; Güth, J.-F. Metal-free implant-supported single-tooth restorations. Part II: Hybrid abutment crowns and material selection. Quintessence Int. 2019, 50, 260–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cascos-Sanchez, R.; Molinero-Mourelle, P.; Ortega, R.; Agustin-Panadero, R.; Del Rio-Highsmith, J.; Gomez-Polo, M. Comparative In Vitro Study of the Bond Strength of Composite to Carbon Fiber Versus Ceramic to Cobalt–Chromium Alloys Frameworks for Fixed Dental Prostheses. Materials 2020, 13, 3173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonzalo, E.; Vizoso, B.; Lopez-Suarez, C.; Diaz, P.; Pelaez, J.; Suarez, M.J. Evaluation of Milled Titanium versus Laser Sintered Co-Cr Abutments on the Marginal Misfit in Internal Implant-Abutment Connection. Materials 2020, 13, 4873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Revilla-León, M.; Özcan, M. Additive Manufacturing Technologies Used for 3D Metal Printing in Dentistry. Curr. Oral Health Rep. 2017, 4, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zuskova, L.; Mortadi, N.A.A.; Williams, R.J.; Alzoubi, K.H.; Khabour, O.F. Comparison of Overall Fit of Milled and Laser-Sintered CAD/CAM Crown Copings. Int. J. Dent. 2019, 2019, 7310175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Linkevičius, T.; Vaitelis, J. The effect of zirconia or titanium as abutment material on soft peri-implant tissues: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2015, 26, 139–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Naveau, A.; Rignon-Bret, C.; Wulfman, C. Zirconia abutments in the anterior region: A systematic review of mechanical and esthetic outcomes. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2019, 121, 775–781.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mello, C.C.; Lemos, C.A.A.; de Gomes, J.M.L.; Verri, F.R.; Pellizzer, E.P. CAD/CAM vs Conventional Technique for Fabrication of Implant-Supported Frameworks: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of In Vitro Studies. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2019, 32, 182–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vélez, J.; Peláez, J.; López-Suárez, C.; Agustín-Panadero, R.; Tobar, C.; Suárez, M.J. Influence of Implant Connection, Abutment Design and Screw Insertion Torque on Implant-Abutment Misfit. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9, 2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morgan, E.F.; Unnikrisnan, G.U.; Hussein, A.I. Bone Mechanical Properties in Healthy and Diseased States. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2018, 20, 119–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO 13356:2015. Dentistry-Implants for Surgery-Ceramic Materials Based on Yttria-Stabilized Tetragonal Zirconia (Y-TZP); ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015; Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/62373.html (accessed on 29 April 2021).
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO 5832-12:2019. Dentistry-Implants for Surgery-Metallic Materials-Part 12: Wrought Cobalt-Chromium-Molybdenum Alloy; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019; Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/72594.html (accessed on 29 April 2021).
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14801:2016. Dentistry-Implants–Dynamic Loading Test for Endosseous Dental Implants; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016; Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/61997.html (accessed on 29 April 2021).
- Pan, Y.; Tsoi, J.K.H.; Lam, W.Y.H.; Pow, E.H.N. Implant framework misfit: A systematic review on assessment methods and clinical complications. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 2021, 23, 244–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rismanchian, M.; Hatami, M.; Badrian, H.; Khalighinejad, N.; Goroohi, H. Evaluation of Microgap Size and Microbial Leakage in the Connection Area of 4 Abutments With Straumann (ITI) Implant. J. Oral Implantol. 2012, 38, 677–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldassarri, M.; Hjerppe, J.; Romeo, D.; Fickl, S.; Thompson, V.P.; Stappert, C.F. Marginal accuracy of three implant-ceramic abutment configurations. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 2012, 27, 537–543. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Groten, M.; Axmann, D.; Pröbster, L.; Weber, H. Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in vitro testing. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2000, 83, 40–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nawafleh, N.A.; Mack, F.; Evans, J.; Mackay, J.; Hatamleh, M.M. Accuracy and Reliability of Methods to Measure Marginal Adaptation of Crowns and FDPs: A Literature Review. J. Prosthodont. 2013, 22, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Son, K.; Lee, S.; Kang, S.H.; Park, J.; Lee, K.-B.; Jeon, M.; Yun, B.-J. A Comparison Study of Marginal and Internal Fit Assessment Methods for Fixed Dental Prostheses. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gassino, G.; Monfrin, S.B.; Scanu, M.; Spina, G.; Preti, G. Marginal adaptation of fixed prosthodontics: A new in vitro 360-degree external examination procedure. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2004, 17, 218–223. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Tsuge, T.; Hagiwara, Y.; Matsumura, H. Marginal Fit and Microgaps of Implant-abutment Interface with Internal Anti-rotation Configuration. Dent. Mater. J. 2008, 27, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Şen, N.; Şermet, I.B.; Gürler, N. Sealing capability and marginal fit of titanium versus zirconia abutments with different connection designs. J. Adv. Prosthodont. 2019, 11, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- de França, D.G.B.; Morais, M.H.S.; das Neves, F.D.; Barbosa, G.A. Influence of CAD/CAM on the fit accuracy of implant-supported zirconia and cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2015, 113, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branemark, P.I.; Zarb, G.A.; Albrektsson, T. Tissue-Integrated Prostheses; Quintessence: Chicago, IL, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Klineberg, I.J.; Murray, G.M. Design of superstructures for osseointegrated fixtures. Swed. Dent. J. 1985, 28, 63–69. [Google Scholar]
- Jemt, T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Brånemark implants in eden-tulous jaws: A study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 1991, 3, 270–276. [Google Scholar]
- Mishra, S.K.; Chowdhary, R.; Kumari, S. Microleakage at the Different Implant Abutment Interface: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 2017, 11, ZE10–ZE15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El Haddad, E.; Giannì, A.B.; Mancini, G.E.; Cura, F.; Carinci, F. Implant-abutment leaking of replace conical connection nobel biocare® implant system. An in vitro study of the microbiological penetration from external environment to implant-abutment space. Oral Implantol 2016, 9, 76–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nascimento, C.D.; Pita, M.S.; de Santos, E.S.; Monesi, M.; Pedrazzi, V.; Junior, R.G.A.; Ribeiro, R.F. Microbiome of titanium and zirconia dental implants abutments. Dent. Mater. 2016, 32, 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Torres, E.M.; Rodrigues, R.C.; De Mattos, M.G.; Ribeiro, R.F. The effect of commercially pure titanium and alternative dental alloys on the marginal fit of one-piece cast implant frameworks. J. Dent. 2007, 35, 800–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fernández, M.; Delgado, L.; Molmeneu, M.; García, D.; Rodríguez, D. Analysis of the misfit of dental implant-supported prostheses made with three manufacturing processes. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2014, 111, 116–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, N.A.; Turkyilmaz, I. Evaluation of the sealing capability of implants to titanium and zirconia abutments against Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Fusobacterium nucleatum under different screw torque values. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2014, 112, 561–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siadat, H.; Beyabanaki, E.; Mousavi, N.; Alikhasi, M. Comparison of fit accuracy and torque maintenance of zirconia and titanium abutments for internal tri-channel and external-hex implant connections. J. Adv. Prosthodont. 2017, 9, 271–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso-Pérez, R.; Bartolomé, J.F.; Ferreiroa, A.; Salido, M.P.; Pradíes, G. Evaluation of the Mechanical Behavior and Marginal Accuracy of Stock and Laser-Sintered Implant Abutments. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2017, 30, 136–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- VanDeWeghe, S.; Coelho, P.G.; Vanhove, C.; Wennerberg, A.; Jimbo, R. Utilizing micro-computed tomography to evaluate bone structure surrounding dental implants: A comparison with histomorphometry. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B Appl. Biomater. 2013, 101, 1259–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- De-Azevedo-Vaz, S.L.; Araujo-Siqueira, C.; Carneiro, V.C.; Oliveira, M.L.; Azeredo, R.A. Misfit detection in implant-supported prostheses of different compositions by periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography: An in vitro study. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2020, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Habib, S.R.; Alotaibi, A.; Al Hazza, N.; Allam, Y.; Alghazi, M. Two-body wear behavior of human enamel versus monolithic zirconia, lithium disilicate, ceramometal and composite resin. J. Adv. Prosthodont. 2019, 11, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stawarczyk, B.; Özcan, M.; Schmutz, F.; Trottmann, A.; Roos, M.; Hämmerle, C.H. Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists. Acta Odontol. Scand. 2013, 71, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Özcan, M.; Jonasch, M. Effect of Cyclic Fatigue Tests on Aging and Their Translational Implications for Survival of All-Ceramic Tooth-Borne Single Crowns and Fixed Dental Prostheses. J. Prosthodont. 2018, 27, 364–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Carr, A.B.; Sinha, N.; Lohse, C.M.; Muller, O.M.; Salinas, T.J. Association Between Early Implant Failure and Prosthodontic Characteristics. J. Prosthodont. 2019, 28, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Group | Material Composition | Material Manufacturer | Prosthetic Manufacturer |
---|---|---|---|
ZrCAD (G1) 1 | 3 mol% yttria stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (3Y-TZP-A) 2 | Dental Direkt GmbH. Spenge, Germany | CORE 3D PROTECH, S.L.U. Santpedor. Spain |
Co–CrMill (G2) 3 | 63% Co, 29% Cr, 6% Mo, <1% Nb, Si, Mn, Fe | Dental Direkt GmbH. Spenge, Germany | CORE 3D PROTECH, S.L.U. Santpedor. Spain |
Co–CrLS (G3) 4 | 59% Co, 25% Cr, 9.5% W, 3.5% M, 1% Si | S and S Scheftner GmbH-dental alloys. Mainz, Germany | Prótesis S.A. Madrid. Spain |
Co–CrCL (G4) 5 | 61% Co, 24% Cr, 8% W, 2.5% Mo, 1% Nb, 1% Mn, 1% Si, 1% Fe | Dentalforschung Schleicher GmbH. Riedenburg Germany | Riosa Laboratory Pozuelo de Alarcón. Spain. |
Fabrication Technique and Material | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Data | ZirCAD | Co–CrMill | Co–CrLS | Co–CrCL |
Microgap Per Area | ||||
N | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
Buccal | 2.45 ± 1.91 | 3.62 ± 4.83 | 11.54 ± 10.08 | 19.57 ± 27.25 |
Palatal | 1.70 ± 1.41 | 2.02 ± 1.21 | 12.97 ± 15.44 | 18.79 ± 30.64 |
Mesial | 3.02 ± 5.37 | 1.73 ± 1.60 | 16.71 ± 8.68 | 18.44 ± 25.93 |
Distal | 3.11 ± 2.65 | 1.66 ± 2.10 | 13.17 ± 13.13 | 16.78 ± 25.02 |
Mean Microgap | ||||
Mean | 2.57 ± 1.54 | 2.26 ± 1.96 | 13.60 ± 5.83 | 18.40 ± 22.89 |
Median | 2.32 | 1.35 | 11.13 | 8.18 |
Minimum | 0.12 | 0.69 | 7.31 | 1.68 |
Maximum | 6.57 | 8.39 | 25.73 | 85.97 |
Manufacturing Technique and Material | Area | Statistical Quantifying | Standard Error | Statistical Quantifying Deviation | Sig 1 | Sig 2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZrCAD vs. Co–CrMill | B | −0.656 | 6.582 | −0.100 | 0.921 | 1.000 |
M | −0.313 | 6.579 | −0.048 | 0.962 | 1.000 | |
D | −10.938 | 6.581 | −1.662 | 0.097 | 0.579 | |
L | −4.125 | 6.583 | −0.627 | 0.531 | 1.000 | |
T | −5.875 | 6.583 | −0.892 | 0.372 | 1.000 | |
ZrCAD vs. Co–CrCL | B | −18.063 | 6.582 | −2.744 | 0.006 | 0.036 |
M | −21.375 | 6.579 | −3.249 | 0.001 | 0.007 | |
D | −8.125 | 6.581 | −1.235 | 0.217 | 1.000 | |
L | −22.313 | 6.583 | −3.390 | 0.001 | 0.004 | |
T | −21.188 | 6.583 | −3.219 | 0.001 | 0.008 | |
ZrCAD vs. Co–CrLS | B | −24.656 | 6.582 | −3.746 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
M | −27.188 | 6.579 | −4.133 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
D | −18.813 | 6.581 | −2.858 | 0.004 | 0.026 | |
L | −32.563 | 6.583 | −4.947 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
T | −27.938 | 6.583 | −4.244 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
Co–CrMill vs. Co–CrCL | B | −17.406 | 6.582 | −2.645 | 0.008 | 0.049 |
M | −21.688 | 6.579 | −3.297 | 0.001 | 0.006 | |
D | −19.063 | 6.581 | −2.896 | 0.004 | 0.023 | |
L | −18.188 | 6.583 | −2.763 | 0.006 | 0.034 | |
T | −27.0.63 | 6.583 | −4.111 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
Co–CrMill vs. Co–CrLS | B | −24.000 | 6.582 | −3.646 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
M | −27.500 | 6.579 | −4.180 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
D | −29.750 | 6.581 | −4.520 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
L | −28.438 | 6.583 | −4.320 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
T | −33.813 | 6.583 | −5.136 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
Co–CrCL vs. Co–CrLS | B | 6.594 | 6.582 | 1.002 | 0.316 | 1.000 |
M | 5.813 | 6.579 | 0.884 | 0.377 | 1.000 | |
D | 10.688 | 6.581 | 1.624 | 0.104 | 0.626 | |
L | 10.250 | 6.583 | 1.557 | 0.119 | 0.717 | |
T | 6.750 | 6.583 | 1.025 | 0.305 | 1.000 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Molinero-Mourelle, P.; Cascos-Sanchez, R.; Yilmaz, B.; Lam, W.Y.H.; Pow, E.H.N.; Del Río Highsmith, J.; Gómez-Polo, M. Effect of Fabrication Technique on the Microgap of CAD/CAM Cobalt–Chrome and Zirconia Abutments on a Conical Connection Implant: An In Vitro Study. Materials 2021, 14, 2348. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14092348
Molinero-Mourelle P, Cascos-Sanchez R, Yilmaz B, Lam WYH, Pow EHN, Del Río Highsmith J, Gómez-Polo M. Effect of Fabrication Technique on the Microgap of CAD/CAM Cobalt–Chrome and Zirconia Abutments on a Conical Connection Implant: An In Vitro Study. Materials. 2021; 14(9):2348. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14092348
Chicago/Turabian StyleMolinero-Mourelle, Pedro, Rocio Cascos-Sanchez, Burak Yilmaz, Walter Yu Hang Lam, Edmond Ho Nang Pow, Jaime Del Río Highsmith, and Miguel Gómez-Polo. 2021. "Effect of Fabrication Technique on the Microgap of CAD/CAM Cobalt–Chrome and Zirconia Abutments on a Conical Connection Implant: An In Vitro Study" Materials 14, no. 9: 2348. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14092348