Jekita Kaenploy, Rui Li, Steven Makowka, Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh
{"title":"水泥固位的二硅酸锂种植体支撑冠的抗折性:两件式基台所用材料的影响。","authors":"Jekita Kaenploy, Rui Li, Steven Makowka, Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh","doi":"10.1111/jopr.13871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared the fracture strength of single lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns fabricated on two-piece abutments with various materials: ceramic-reinforced PEEK, zirconia, and lithium disilicate.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty-six implants were embedded in acrylic cylinders. A two-piece abutment and a crown were designed following a pre-operation scan for a maxillary left central incisor. The designed crown was used to fabricate 36 lithium disilicate crowns. The designed abutment was used to manufacture 36 abutments from 3 materials, 12 each: (A) zirconia; (B) lithium disilicate; and (C) ceramic-reinforced PEEK. Abutments were surface treated and bonded on the titanium base abutments with resin cement. Then, lithium disilicate crowns were bonded on the assigned abutments. Specimens were then subjected to dynamic loading for 1,200,000 cycles. The fracture strength (N) of the assembly was assessed using a universal testing machine. One-way ANOVA followed by multiple comparison tests was used to evaluate the effect of abutment material on the fracture strength of single implant-supported restorations at a significance of .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average fracture strength for the groups with zirconia, PEEK, and lithium disilicate two-piece abutments were 1362N ± 218N, 1235N ± 115N, and 1472N ± 171N, respectively. There was a significant (p < 0.05) difference in fracture strength among the groups. The lithium disilicate group had significantly higher fracture strength (p = 0.0058) than the group with PEEK; however, there was no significant (p > 0.05) difference between the other groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Two-piece abutments restored with lithium disilicate crowns investigated in the study have the potential to withstand the average physiological occlusal forces in the anterior region.</p>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fracture resistance of cement-retained lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns: Effect of material used for two-piece abutments.\",\"authors\":\"Jekita Kaenploy, Rui Li, Steven Makowka, Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jopr.13871\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared the fracture strength of single lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns fabricated on two-piece abutments with various materials: ceramic-reinforced PEEK, zirconia, and lithium disilicate.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty-six implants were embedded in acrylic cylinders. A two-piece abutment and a crown were designed following a pre-operation scan for a maxillary left central incisor. The designed crown was used to fabricate 36 lithium disilicate crowns. The designed abutment was used to manufacture 36 abutments from 3 materials, 12 each: (A) zirconia; (B) lithium disilicate; and (C) ceramic-reinforced PEEK. Abutments were surface treated and bonded on the titanium base abutments with resin cement. Then, lithium disilicate crowns were bonded on the assigned abutments. Specimens were then subjected to dynamic loading for 1,200,000 cycles. The fracture strength (N) of the assembly was assessed using a universal testing machine. One-way ANOVA followed by multiple comparison tests was used to evaluate the effect of abutment material on the fracture strength of single implant-supported restorations at a significance of .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average fracture strength for the groups with zirconia, PEEK, and lithium disilicate two-piece abutments were 1362N ± 218N, 1235N ± 115N, and 1472N ± 171N, respectively. There was a significant (p < 0.05) difference in fracture strength among the groups. The lithium disilicate group had significantly higher fracture strength (p = 0.0058) than the group with PEEK; however, there was no significant (p > 0.05) difference between the other groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Two-piece abutments restored with lithium disilicate crowns investigated in the study have the potential to withstand the average physiological occlusal forces in the anterior region.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13871\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13871","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Fracture resistance of cement-retained lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns: Effect of material used for two-piece abutments.
Purpose: This study compared the fracture strength of single lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns fabricated on two-piece abutments with various materials: ceramic-reinforced PEEK, zirconia, and lithium disilicate.
Materials and methods: Thirty-six implants were embedded in acrylic cylinders. A two-piece abutment and a crown were designed following a pre-operation scan for a maxillary left central incisor. The designed crown was used to fabricate 36 lithium disilicate crowns. The designed abutment was used to manufacture 36 abutments from 3 materials, 12 each: (A) zirconia; (B) lithium disilicate; and (C) ceramic-reinforced PEEK. Abutments were surface treated and bonded on the titanium base abutments with resin cement. Then, lithium disilicate crowns were bonded on the assigned abutments. Specimens were then subjected to dynamic loading for 1,200,000 cycles. The fracture strength (N) of the assembly was assessed using a universal testing machine. One-way ANOVA followed by multiple comparison tests was used to evaluate the effect of abutment material on the fracture strength of single implant-supported restorations at a significance of .05.
Results: The average fracture strength for the groups with zirconia, PEEK, and lithium disilicate two-piece abutments were 1362N ± 218N, 1235N ± 115N, and 1472N ± 171N, respectively. There was a significant (p < 0.05) difference in fracture strength among the groups. The lithium disilicate group had significantly higher fracture strength (p = 0.0058) than the group with PEEK; however, there was no significant (p > 0.05) difference between the other groups.
Conclusions: Two-piece abutments restored with lithium disilicate crowns investigated in the study have the potential to withstand the average physiological occlusal forces in the anterior region.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.