Zeynab Ahmed, Marc Joos, Roland Joos, Martin Rosentritt, Sebastian Kühl, Valentin Herber
{"title":"PEKK与氧化锆基台在两片式氧化锆种植体螺钉保留冠中的性能比较:一项体外研究。","authors":"Zeynab Ahmed, Marc Joos, Roland Joos, Martin Rosentritt, Sebastian Kühl, Valentin Herber","doi":"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-25-00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to compare the in vitro performance of anterior and posterior crowns with screw-retained polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) or zirconia abutments on two-piece zirconia implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Monolithic incisor and molar zirconia crowns (n=8 per group) were cemented on either PEKK or zirconia screw-retained abutments on zirconia implants. Molar and incisor crowns were also cemented on screw-retained titanium abutments on titanium implants as control. All specimens were subjected to combined mechanical loading (1.2 × 106 cycles of 50N, f = 1Hz) and thermal cycling (2 × 3000 × 5°C/55°C cycles of 2 min). Complications, such as loosening of the crowns and fractures, were observed. The surviving specimens were subjected to a fracture test. Descriptive statistics were applied to complications, survival times, and fracture forces.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The occurrence of complications depended significantly on location (anterior or posterior) and material (P<.0001). While the incisor test groups presented higher failure rates for both PEKK and zirconia abutments, the survival rates of the molar-shaped crowns of both test groups were comparable to those of the titanium control group. This highly significant interaction is caused by a highly significant difference in location for PEKK and zirconia (P<.05). The titanium control group showed uniform performance independent of the simulated site.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PEKK abutments showed high survival rates for in vitro simulated molar sites. Screw-retained zirconia abutments have shown higher complication rates, especially in simulated anterior sites. Neither zirconia nor PEKK abutments seem to be recommendable in clinical application for anterior indication.</p>","PeriodicalId":519890,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of oral implantology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Performance of PEKK versus Zirconia Abutments for Screw-Retained Crowns in Two-Piece Zirconia Implants: an in vitro Study.\",\"authors\":\"Zeynab Ahmed, Marc Joos, Roland Joos, Martin Rosentritt, Sebastian Kühl, Valentin Herber\",\"doi\":\"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-25-00014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to compare the in vitro performance of anterior and posterior crowns with screw-retained polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) or zirconia abutments on two-piece zirconia implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Monolithic incisor and molar zirconia crowns (n=8 per group) were cemented on either PEKK or zirconia screw-retained abutments on zirconia implants. Molar and incisor crowns were also cemented on screw-retained titanium abutments on titanium implants as control. All specimens were subjected to combined mechanical loading (1.2 × 106 cycles of 50N, f = 1Hz) and thermal cycling (2 × 3000 × 5°C/55°C cycles of 2 min). Complications, such as loosening of the crowns and fractures, were observed. The surviving specimens were subjected to a fracture test. Descriptive statistics were applied to complications, survival times, and fracture forces.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The occurrence of complications depended significantly on location (anterior or posterior) and material (P<.0001). While the incisor test groups presented higher failure rates for both PEKK and zirconia abutments, the survival rates of the molar-shaped crowns of both test groups were comparable to those of the titanium control group. This highly significant interaction is caused by a highly significant difference in location for PEKK and zirconia (P<.05). The titanium control group showed uniform performance independent of the simulated site.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PEKK abutments showed high survival rates for in vitro simulated molar sites. Screw-retained zirconia abutments have shown higher complication rates, especially in simulated anterior sites. Neither zirconia nor PEKK abutments seem to be recommendable in clinical application for anterior indication.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of oral implantology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of oral implantology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-25-00014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of oral implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-25-00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Performance of PEKK versus Zirconia Abutments for Screw-Retained Crowns in Two-Piece Zirconia Implants: an in vitro Study.
Objectives: This study aimed to compare the in vitro performance of anterior and posterior crowns with screw-retained polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) or zirconia abutments on two-piece zirconia implants.
Materials and methods: Monolithic incisor and molar zirconia crowns (n=8 per group) were cemented on either PEKK or zirconia screw-retained abutments on zirconia implants. Molar and incisor crowns were also cemented on screw-retained titanium abutments on titanium implants as control. All specimens were subjected to combined mechanical loading (1.2 × 106 cycles of 50N, f = 1Hz) and thermal cycling (2 × 3000 × 5°C/55°C cycles of 2 min). Complications, such as loosening of the crowns and fractures, were observed. The surviving specimens were subjected to a fracture test. Descriptive statistics were applied to complications, survival times, and fracture forces.
Results: The occurrence of complications depended significantly on location (anterior or posterior) and material (P<.0001). While the incisor test groups presented higher failure rates for both PEKK and zirconia abutments, the survival rates of the molar-shaped crowns of both test groups were comparable to those of the titanium control group. This highly significant interaction is caused by a highly significant difference in location for PEKK and zirconia (P<.05). The titanium control group showed uniform performance independent of the simulated site.
Conclusion: PEKK abutments showed high survival rates for in vitro simulated molar sites. Screw-retained zirconia abutments have shown higher complication rates, especially in simulated anterior sites. Neither zirconia nor PEKK abutments seem to be recommendable in clinical application for anterior indication.