The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Correlation between microleakage and screw loosening at implant-abutment connection

  • Sahin, Cem (School of Health Services, Dental Prosthetics Technology, Hacettepe University) ;
  • Ayyildiz, Simel (Department of Prosthodontics, Center for Dental Sciences, Gulhane Military Medical Academy)
  • Received : 2013.07.24
  • Accepted : 2014.01.06
  • Published : 2014.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between microleakage and screw loosening at different types of implant-abutment connections and/or geometries measuring the torque values before and after the leakage tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three different abutment types (Intenal hex titanium, internal hex zirconium, morse tapered titanium) with different geometries were connected to its own implant fixture. All the abutments were tightened with a standard torque value then the composition was connected to the modified fluid filtration system. After the measurements of leakage removal torque values were re-measured. Kruskal-wallis test was performed for non-parametric and one-way ANOVA was performed for parametric data. The correlation was evaluated using Spearman Correlation Test (${\alpha}=0.05$). RESULTS. Significantly higher microleakage was found at the connection of implant-internal hex zirconium abutment. Observed mean torque value loss was also significantly higher than other connection geometries. Spearman tests revealed a significant correlation between microleakage and screw loosening. CONCLUSION. Microleakage may provoke screw loosening. Removing torque values rationally decrease with the increase of microleakage.

Keywords

References

  1. McGlumphy EA, Mendel DA, Holloway JA. Implant screw mechanics. Dent Clin North Am 1998;42:71-89.
  2. Byrne D, Jacobs S, O'Connell B, Houston F, Claffey N. Preloads generated with repeated tightening in three types of screws used in dental implant assemblies. J Prosthodont 2006;15:164-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00096.x
  3. Binon PP. Implants and components: entering the new millennium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:76-94.
  4. Pjetursson BE, Bräg ger U, Lang NP, Zwahlen M. Comparison of survival and complication rates of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant-supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs). Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:97-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01439.x
  5. Jung RE, Pjetursson BE, Glauser R, Zembic A, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:119-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01453.x
  6. Sakaguchi RL, Borgersen SE. Nonlinear contact analysis of preload in dental implant screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:295-302.
  7. Binon PP. The effect of implant/abutment hexagonal misfit on screw joint stability. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:149-60.
  8. al-Turki LE, Chai J, Lautenschlager EP, Hutten MC. Changes in prosthetic screw stability because of misfit of implantsupported prostheses. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:38-42.
  9. Khraisat A, Hashimoto A, Nomura S, Miyakawa O. Effect of lateral cyclic loading on abutment screw loosening of an external hexagon implant system. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:326-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.01.001
  10. Broggini N, McManus LM, Hermann JS, Medina R, Schenk RK, Buser D, Cochran DL. Peri-implant inflammation defined by the implant-abutment interface. J Dent Res 2006; 85:473-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910608500515
  11. do Nascimento C, Barbosa RE, Issa JP, Watanabe E, Ito IY, Albuquerque RF Jr. Bacterial leakage along the implant-abutment interface of premachined or cast components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;37:177-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2007.07.026
  12. Cardoso M, Torres MF, Lourenço EJ, de Moraes Telles D, Rodrigues RC, Ribeiro RF. Torque removal evaluation of prosthetic screws after tightening and loosening cycles: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:475-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02165.x
  13. Spazzin AO, Henrique GE, Nóbilo MA, Consani RL, Correr- Sobrinho L, Mesquita MF. Effect of retorque on loosening torque of prosthetic screws under two levels of fit of implant- supported dentures. Braz Dent J 2010;21:12-7. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402010000100002
  14. Sahin C, Cehreli ZC, Yenigul M, Dayangac B. In vitro permeability of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives used for immediate dentin sealing. Dent Mater J 2012;31:401-8. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2011-217
  15. Pessoa RS, Muraru L, Júnior EM, Vaz LG, Sloten JV, Duyck J, Jaecques SV. Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants - CT-based nonlinear, three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010;12:219-34.
  16. Jansen VK, Conrads G, Richter EJ. Microbial leakage and marginal fit of the implant-abutment interface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:527-40.
  17. Haack JE, Sakaguchi RL, Sun T, Coffey JP. Elongation and preload stress in dental implant abutment screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:529-36.
  18. Gross M, Abramovich I, Weiss EI. Microleakage at the abutment- implant interface of osseointegrated implants: a comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:94-100.
  19. Coelho PG, Sudack P, Suzuki M, Kurtz KS, Romanos GE, Silva NR. In vitro evaluation of the implant abutment connection sealing capability of different implant systems. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:917-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2008.01886.x
  20. Steinebrunner L, Wolfart S, Bössmann K, Kern M. In vitro evaluation of bacterial leakage along the implant-abutment interface of different implant systems. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:875-81.
  21. Barbosa GA, Bernardes SR, das Neves FD, Fernandes Neto AJ, de Mattos Mda G, Ribeiro RF. Relation between implant/ abutment vertical misfit and torque loss of abutment screws. Braz Dent J 2008;19:358-63. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402008000400013
  22. Verran J, Maryan CJ. Retention of Candida albicans on acrylic resin and silicone of different surface topography. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:535-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70148-3
  23. Taylor R, Maryan C, Verran J. Retention of oral microorganisms on cobalt-chromium alloy and dental acrylic resin with different surface finishes. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:592-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70037-X

Cited by

  1. Influence of Abutment Surface Treatments on Screw Loosening of Morse Taper Implants vol.26, pp.5, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000622
  2. Comparative study of abutment screw loosening with or without adhesive material vol.9, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.2.99
  3. Production of a Piece of Custom-Made Abutment Screwdriver: Technique and Case Report vol.45, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-18-00178
  4. Mechanism of and factors associated with the loosening of the implant abutment screw: A review vol.31, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12494
  5. A Comparative 3D Finite Element Computational Study of Three Connections vol.12, pp.19, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12193135
  6. Abutment screw loosening in implants: A literature review vol.9, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1343_20
  7. Comparison of the Morse Cone Connection with the Internal Hexagon and External Hexagon Connections Based on Microleakage - Review vol.122, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.14712/23362936.2021.15
  8. Performance of different abutment/implant joints as a result of a sealing agent vol.65, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.jpr_d_20_00025
  9. Comparison of the Effect of Four Different Abutment Screw Torques on Screw Loosening in Single Implant-Supported Prosthesis after the Application of Mechanical Loading vol.2021, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/3595064
  10. Analysis of Torque Maintenance and Fracture Resistance after Fatigue in Retention Screws Made of Different Metals for Screw-Retained Implant-Borne Prosthesis Joints vol.2021, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9693239
  11. Effect of fluid contamination on reverse torque values in implant-abutment connections under oral conditions vol.13, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.1.65
  12. Screw stability of CAD‐CAM titanium and zirconia abutments on different implants: An in vitro study vol.23, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13001
  13. Effect of Application of a Bio-Adhesive on the Removal Torque Value and Rotational Misfit at the Implant-Abutment Junction: An In Vitro Study vol.14, pp.22, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14226832