Browse > Article

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

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)
Publication Information
Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science / v.27, no.4, 2011 , pp. 343-358 More about this Journal
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.
Keywords
Implant connection system; Removal torque values; Screw tightening method; Screw tightening sequence;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 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.
2 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.
3 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.
4 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Mcglumphy E. Keeping implant screws tight. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:628-31.
6 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.
7 Misch CE. Principles for screw-ratained prostheses. in: Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd ed., Missouri: CV Mosby 1999: 669-85.
8 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.
9 Burguete RL, Johns RB, King T, Patterson EA. Tightening characteristics for screwed joints in osseointegrated dental implant. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:592-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Jaarda MJ, Razzoong ME, Gratton DG. Comparison of "look-alike" implant prosthetic retaining screws. J prosthodont. 1995;4:23-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Hobo S, Ichida E, Garcia LT. Chapter 9 Fully bone anchored prostheses. In: Osseointegration and Occlusal Rehabilitation. Tokyo: Qiuntessence, 1989: 163-86.
12 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.
13 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 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.
15 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.
16 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.
17 Assif D, Renton A, Zarb G, Schmitt A. Comparative accuracy of implant impression procedures. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1992;12:112-21.
18 Carr AB. A comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:448-55.
19 Barrett MG, de Rijk WG, Burgess JO. The accuracy of six impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthodont 1993;2: 75-82.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 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.
22 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.
23 Rangert B, Jemt T, Jӧrneus L. Forces and moments on Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 1989;4:241-7.
24 Schulte JK, Coffey J. Comparison of screw retention of nine abutment systems: a pilot study. Implant Dent 1997;6:28-31.
25 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.
26 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.
27 Balfour A, O' Brien GR. Comparative study of antirotational single tooth abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73:36-43.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 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.
30 Cho IH. Biomechanical analysis of implant prosthodontic restorations. J Kor Dent Assoc 1993;31: 438-43.
31 Binon PP. The effect of implant/abutment hex agonal misfit on screw joint stability. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:149-60.
32 Binon PP. Implants and components; Entering the new millenium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:76-94.
33 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.
34 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.