Removal Torque Values of Retaining Screws Tightened to Implant-Supported Prosthesis with Different Connection Systems by Various Tightening Technique

다른 연결 시스템을 갖는 임플랜트 상부 구조물에서 조임술식에 따른 지대주 나사의 풀림 토크값에 대한 연구

  • Kim, Dong-Wook (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Choi, Yu-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Jo, In-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 김동욱 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실) ;
  • 최유성 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실) ;
  • 조인호 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실)
  • Received : 2011.09.03
  • Accepted : 2011.12.25
  • Published : 2011.12.31

Abstract

As implant treatment has become popular, lots of different shapes and materials of the implant upper component have been supplied. And there are also diverse reports about failures including loosening of the abutment screw which is one of the most common reason. Purpose : The purpose of this study is to find out how different screw tightening orders and methods influence on screw loosening according to the different connection systems. The upper component was fabricated by casting method. After fabricating master models that are precisely attached to the upper component, 5 experimental models each for the external connection system and internal connection system were fabricated using splinting impression technique. First, to find out the influence of the screw tightening order, screws were tightened in 3 orders; 1-2-3-4, 2-3-1-4, 2-4-3-1. After tightening, removal torque values (RTV) of each group was measured. And also to find out the influence of screw tightening method, a model with 2-3-1-4 screw tightening order was tightened with 30 Ncm at one time(1-step method) and the RTV was compared with the same order group (2-3-1-4) in the 2 step method. In the external connection system, RTV appeared significantly lower in group 2-3-1-4 than group 2-4-3-1 (p<0.05). And also in the internal connection system, the RTV of group 2-3-1-4 appeared significantly lower than that of group 2-4-3-1 and 1-2-3-4 (p<0.05). When comparing the tightening number of the screw without considering the screw tightening order, the first tightened screw appeared significantly higher RTV than the second one in the external connection system (p<0.05), however there was no significant difference from the first tightened screw to the last tightened screw in the internal connection system. And there was no statistically significant difference between the two screw tightening methods in both internal and external connection system. In the comparison of external and internal connection system, each RTV appeared 16.27 Ncm and 14.25 Ncm and appeared as a statistically significant difference (p<0.05). There was a significant difference in RTV measured according to the screw tightening order. The lowest RTV appeared in the groups started tightening from the middle. There was also a significant difference in RTV between the two connection system groups. A further study is needed to find out the influence factors in RTV and also a study is required related to the load condition.

임플랜트 치료가 보편화되고, 다양한 형태와 재료의 상부 구조물이 보급되었다. 그리고 실패에 대한 보고도 다양하며, 그 중 지대나사의 풀림현상이 가장 흔하다고 지적되고 있다. 본 연구는 외부연결구조와 내부연결구조 임플랜트에 의해 지지되는 상부 구조물을 나사로 연결할 때, 세 가지 나사조임순서와 두 가지 나사조임방법에 따른 나사의 풀림 토크값을 비교하여 나사조임순서와 나사조임방법이 서로 다른 연결구조에 따라 나사풀림현상에 미치는 영향을 알아보고자 하였다. 완전 무치악 하악모형을 자가중합형 아크릴릭 레진으로 제작하고 이공간 부위에 중심간 거리가 약 15 mm 되도록 네 개의 임플랜트 고정체 유사체를 고정한 후 바 타입으로 납형 형성하여 상부 구조물을 주조 제작하였다. 상부 구조물과 정확한 적합이 되는 주모형을 제작한 후 연결 인상법으로 외부연결구조, 내부연결구조를 가지는 연구모형을 각각 5개씩 제작하였다. 각 모형에서 각 나사의 풀림 토크값을 가장 왼쪽에 조여지는 나사를 1번 나사로 하고 가장 오른쪽의 나사를 4번 나사로 명명하였다. 먼저, 나사조임순서의 영향을 알아보기 위해 1-2-3-4, 2-3-1-4, 2-4-3-1의 순서로 15 Ncm의 힘으로 조이고, 다시 같은 순서로 최종 조임토크값인 30 Ncm까지 조인 후 (2-step 방법) 각 나사의 풀림 토크값을 측정하였다. 또한 나사조임방법의 영향을 알아보기 위해 2-3-1-4의 순서로 한 번에 최종 조임토크값인 30 Ncm까지 조인 후 (1-step 방법) 각 나사의 풀림 토크값을 측정하여 같은 순서 (2-3-1-4)의 2-step 방법과 비교하였다. 세 가지 나사조임순서에 따른 나사의 풀림 토크값은 외부연결구조에서 2-3-1-4군이 2-4-3-1군보다 유의하게 낮았다 (p<0.05). 그리고 내부연결구조에서도 2-3-1-4군이 2-4-3-1군과 1-2-3-4군보다 유의하게 낮았다 (p<0.05). 또한 나사조임순서와 무관하게 몇 번째 조여진 나사인지에 따른 풀림 토크값을 비교해 본 결과, 외부연결구조에서는 처음에 조여진 나사가 두 번째 조여진 나사보다 유의하게 높았으나 (p<0.05), 내부연결구조에서는 처음에 조여진 나사에서부터 마지막에 조여진 나사 간에 차이가 없었다. 그리고 두 가지 나사조임방법 간에는 외부연결구조와 내부연결구조 모두에서 통계학적으로 유의한 차이가 없었다. 연결구조에 대한 비교에서 외부연결구조와 내부연결구조의 풀림 토크값은 각각 16.27 Ncm, 14.25 Ncm 였으며, 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타났다 (p<0.05). 다수 임플랜트에 의해 지지되는 상부 구조물을 나사로 연결할 때, 나사조임순서에 따라 차이가 있었으며, 가운데부터 조인 경우에서 풀림 토크값이 낮았고, 연결구조 간에도 차이가 있었다. 풀림 토크값에 미치는 요인에 대해 좀 더 상세히 분석할 필요가 있으며, 하중 조건에서의 부가적인 연구가 필요할 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Cho IH. Biomechanical analysis of implant prosthodontic restorations. J Kor Dent Assoc 1993;31: 438-43.
  2. Binon PP. The effect of implant/abutment hex agonal misfit on screw joint stability. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:149-60.
  3. Binon PP. Implants and components; Entering the new millenium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:76-94.
  4. Kang YM, Lim JH, Cho IH. A study on the abutment screw loosening of dental implant. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 1996;34(1):1-14.
  5. Lee WJ, Lim Jh, Cho IH. Stress of dental implant abutment screw by the tightening torque. J Korean Acad of Prosthodont 1998;36(5):720-37.
  6. Lim JB, Yim SH, Cho IH. The effect of screw hole sealing method on abutment screw loosening in dental implant. J Korean Acad of Prosthodont 1997;35(4): 767-77.
  7. Cho SM, Lim JH, Cho IH. A study on geometric comparison of four interchangeable implant prosthetic retaining screw and measurement of loosening torque. J Korean Acad of Prosthodont 1998;36(3):468-80.
  8. Balshi TJ, Hernandez RE, Pryszlak MC, Rangert B. A comparative study of one implant versus two replacing a single molar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:372-8.
  9. Jemt T, Laney WR, Harris D, Henry PJ, Krogh PH Jr, Polizzi G, Zarb GA, Herrmann I. Osseointegrated implants for single tooth replacement: a 1-year report from a multicenter prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:29-36.
  10. Kemppainen P, Eskola S, Ylipaavalniemi P. A comparative prospective clinical study of two single-tooth implants: A preliminary report of 102 implants. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:382-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70163-X
  11. Mcglumphy E. Keeping implant screws tight. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:628-31.
  12. Jorneus L, Jemt T, Carlsson L. Loads and designs of screw joint for single crowns supported by osseointgrated implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:353-9.
  13. Misch CE. Principles for screw-ratained prostheses. in: Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd ed., Missouri: CV Mosby 1999: 669-85.
  14. Patterson EA, Johns RB. Theoretical analysis of the fatigue life of fixture screws in osseointegrated dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7: 26-33.
  15. Burguete RL, Johns RB, King T, Patterson EA. Tightening characteristics for screwed joints in osseointegrated dental implant. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:592-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(94)90443-X
  16. Jaarda MJ, Razzoong ME, Gratton DG. Comparison of "look-alike" implant prosthetic retaining screws. J prosthodont. 1995;4:23-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1995.tb00310.x
  17. Hobo S, Ichida E, Garcia LT. Chapter 9 Fully bone anchored prostheses. In: Osseointegration and Occlusal Rehabilitation. Tokyo: Qiuntessence, 1989: 163-86.
  18. Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Branemark implants in edentulous jaws: a study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991; 6:270-6.
  19. Nissan J, Gross M, Shifman A, Assf D. Stress levels for well-fitting implant superstructure as a function of tightening force levels, tighteing sequence, and different operators. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:20-3. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.115182
  20. Watanabe F, Uno I, Hata Y, Neuendorff G, Kirsch A. Analysis of stress distribution in a screw-retained implant prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:209-18.
  21. Duyck J, Van Oosterwyck H, Vander Sloten J, De Cooman M, Puers R, Naert I. Pre-load on oral implants after screw tightening fixed full prostheses: an in vivo study. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28:226-33.
  22. Wee AG, Aquilino SA, Schneider RL. Strategies to achieve fit in implant prosthodontics: a review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont 1999;12: 167-78.
  23. Assif D, Renton A, Zarb G, Schmitt A. Comparative accuracy of implant impression procedures. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1992;12:112-21.
  24. Carr AB. A comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:448-55.
  25. Barrett MG, de Rijk WG, Burgess JO. The accuracy of six impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthodont 1993;2: 75-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1993.tb00387.x
  26. Lee HJ, Lim JH, Lee JS. A comparative study on the accuracy of impression body according to the types of impression tray. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2010;48:48-54. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2010.48.1.48
  27. Lim JH, Lee MR, Cho IH. A study on the photoelastic analysis of stresses induced by the connection modalities between natural tooth abutment and dental implant. J Dankook Dent Res Inst 1992;4:141-51.
  28. Choi JH, Kim CW, Lim YJ, Kim MJ, Lee SH. The effect of different screw- tightening techniques on the stress generated on an internal-connection Implant Superstructure. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:1045-53.
  29. Schulte JK, Coffey J. Comparison of screw retention of nine abutment systems: a pilot study. Implant Dent 1997;6:28-31.
  30. Merz BR, Hunenbart S, Belser UC. Mechanics of the implant-abutment connection : an 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:519-26.
  31. Rangert B, Jemt T, Jӧrneus L. Forces and moments on Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 1989;4:241-7.
  32. Balfour A, O' Brien GR. Comparative study of antirotational single tooth abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73:36-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80270-7
  33. Norton MR. An in vitro evaluation of the strength of an internal conical interface compared to a butt joint interface in implant design. Clin Oral Impl Res 1997;8: 290-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080407.x
  34. Yang JS, Vang MS, Cho GJ,. A vitro study of retained screw stability by various connection designs between fixture and abutment in implant dentistry. J Kor Dent Assoc 2004;42: 83-93.