Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2015.53.4.345

Axial wall thickness of zirconia abutment in anterior region  

Moon, Seung-Jin (School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
Heo, Yu-Ri (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
Lee, Gyeong-Je (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
Kim, Hee-Jung (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics / v.53, no.4, 2015 , pp. 345-351 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the proper axial thickness of zirconia abutment applied to implant in the anterior region. Materials and methods: Zirconia abutments were prepared at different axial wall thickness by processing pre-sintered zirconia blocks via CAD/CAM to obtain equal specimens. The abutments were each produced with a thickness of 0.5 mm (Group 1), 0.8 mm (Group 2), 1.2 mm (Group 3), or 1.5 mm (Group 4). The implant used in this study was a external connection type one (US, Osstem, Pussan, Korea) product and the zirconia abutment was prepared via replication of a cemented abutment. The crowns were prepared via CAM/CAM with a thickness of 1.5 mm and were cemented to the abutments using $RelyX^{TM}$ UniCem cement. A universal testing machine was used to apply load at 30 degrees and measure fracture strength of the zirconia abutment. Results: Fracture strength of the abutments for Group 1, Group 2, Group 3, and Group 4 were $236.00{\pm}67.55N$, $599.00{\pm}15.80N$, $588.20{\pm}33.18N$, and $97.83{\pm}98.13N$, respectively. Group 1 showed a significantly lower value, as compared to the other groups (independent Mann-Whitney U-test. P<.05). No significant differences were detected among Group 2, Group 3, and Group 4 (independent Mann-Whitney U-test. P>.05). Conclusion: Zirconia abutment requires optimal thickness for fracture resistance. Within the limitation of this study, > 0.8 mm thickness is recommended for zirconia abutment in anterior implants.
Keywords
Zirconia abutment; Fracture strength; Axial wall thickness;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Glantz PO, Lindhe J. The mucosal attachment at different abutments. An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 1998;25:721-7.   DOI
2 Andersson B, Scharer P, Simion M, Bergstrom C. Ceramic implant abutments used for short-span fixed partial dentures: a prospective 2-year multicenter study. Int J Prosthodont 1999;12:318-24.
3 Welander M, Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T. The mucosal barrier at implant abutments of different materials. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:635-41.
4 Andersson B, Glauser R, Maglione M, Taylor A. Ceramic implant abutments for short-span FPDs: a prospective 5-year multicenter study. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:640-6.
5 Aramouni P, Zebouni E, Tashkandi E, Dib S, Salameh Z, Almas K. Fracture resistance and failure location of zirconium and metallic implant abutments. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008;9:41-8.
6 Att W, Kurun S, Gerds T, Strub JR. Fracture resistance of singletooth implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2006;95:111-6.   DOI
7 Yildirim M, Edelhoff D, Hanisch O, Spiekermann H. Ceramic abutments--a new era in achieving optimal esthetics in implant dentistry. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000;20:81-91.
8 Bressan E1, Paniz G, Lops D, Corazza B, Romeo E, Favero G. Influence of abutment material on the gingival color of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: a prospective multicenter study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:631-7.   DOI
9 Prestipino V, Ingber A. Esthetic high-strength implant abutments. Part I. J Esthet Dent 1993;5:29-36.   DOI
10 Rasperini G, Maglione M, Cocconcelli P, Simion M. In vivo early plaque formation on pure titanium and ceramic abutments: a comparative microbiological and SEM analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9:357-64.   DOI
11 Prestipino V, Ingber A. Esthetic high-strength implant abutments. Part II. J Esthet Dent 1993;5:63-8.   DOI
12 Glauser R, Sailer I, Wohlwend A, Studer S, Schibli M, Scharer P. Experimental zirconia abutments for implant-supported single-tooth restorations in esthetically demanding regions: 4-year results of a prospective clinical study. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:285-90.
13 Reich S1, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. The effect of finish line preparation and layer thickness on the failure load and fractography of $ZrO_2$ copings. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:369-76.   DOI
14 Manicone PF, Rossi Iommetti P, Raffaelli L. An overview of zirconia ceramics: basic properties and clinical applications. J Dent 2007;35:819-26.   DOI
15 Adatia ND, Bayne SC, Cooper LF, Thompson JY. Fracture resistance of yttria-stabilized zirconia dental implant abutments. J Prosthodont 2009;18:17-22.   DOI
16 Yildirim M, Fischer H, Marx R, Edelhoff D. In vivo fracture resistance of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:325-31.   DOI
17 Butz F, Heydecke G, Okutan M, Strub JR. Survival rate, fracture strength and failure mode of ceramic implant abutments after chewing simulation. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:838-43.   DOI
18 Gehrke P, Dhom G, Brunner J, Wolf D, Degidi M, Piattelli A. Zirconium implant abutments: fracture strength and influence of cyclic loading on retaining-screw loosening. Quintessence Int 2006;37:19-26.
19 Yang B1, Lange-Jansen HC, Scharnberg M, Wolfart S, Ludwig K, Adelung R, Kern M. Influence of saliva contamination on zirconia ceramic bonding. Dent Mater 2008;24:508-13.   DOI
20 Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, DeLong R, Pintado MR. The wear of a posterior composite in an artificial mouth: a clinical correlation. Dent Mater 1986;2:235-40.   DOI