External vs internal connection implant system

External vs internal implant : 각각의 장점과 고려사항

  • Seong, Dong-Jae (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Hong, Seoung-Jin (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Ha, Seung-Ryong (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine)
  • 성동재 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실) ;
  • 홍성진 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실) ;
  • 하승룡 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실)
  • Received : 2016.01.23
  • Accepted : 2016.02.19
  • Published : 2016.03.01

Abstract

The osseointegration of titanium implants has been examined over the past 50 years. Many implant systems have been introduced and have become popular to the implant dentistry. The designs of the connection between implant fixture and abutment are divided into external vs internal connection. From beginning, the $Br{\aa}nemark$ system was characterized by an external hexagon. Internal connection has been developed to reduce stress transferred to the bone. These differences may have impact on the clinical procedures and protocols, laboratory and components costs, and incidence of complications. Therefore, the clinician has to know the different biomechanical features and understand their implications to produce successful implant-supported prosthesis with an external or an internal connection system.

Keywords

References

  1. Gracis S et al. INternal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23(Suppl. 6):202-216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02556.x
  2. Goiato MC et al. Is the internal connection more efficient than external connection in mechanical, biological, and esthetic point of views? A systematic review. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;19:229-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-015-0494-5
  3. Schmitt CM et al. Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: A systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 2014;102A:552-574.
  4. Bozkaya D et al. Mechanics of the tapered interference fit in dental implants. J Biomech 2003;36:1649-1658.
  5. ISO 4823:2000, Dentistry, Elastomeric impression materials
  6. Pita MS et al. Prosthetic platforms in implant dentistry. J Craniofac Surg 2011;22:2327-2331. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e318232a706