'Thermo-mechanical behavior of alternative material combinations for full-arch implant-supported hybrid prostheses with short cantilevers'.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the fracture resistance (FR) of three combinations of materials for full-arch maxillary implant-supported hybrid prostheses (HPs) with short cantilevers (≤ 10 mm). METHODS: Maxillary HPs were fabricated and classified as follows (n = 5 each): Group-1 (CC-A, control): acrylic-resin-veneered Co-Cr frameworks; Group-2 (CF-A): acrylic-resin-veneered carbon-fiber mesostructures; and Group-3 (CF-R): composite-resin-veneered carbon-fiber frames. Specimens were thermal-cycled (5,000 cycles; 5 °C-55 °C; dwell time: 30 s). Vertical loads were applied until failure, first at the 10-mm-long cantilever (LC), and, afterwards, at the anterior region (AR), using a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 0.05 mm/s). The fracture pattern was assessed by stereomicroscope and SEM. The one-way ANOVA, the Bonferroni, and the independent samples t tests, were run (α= 0.05). RESULTS: At LC, CF-A, and CC-A samples exhibited the highest FR values (p< 0.001), showing no differences to each other. At AR, CC-A specimens recorded the highest FR, followed by CF-A samples (p< 0.001). CF-R HPs displayed the lowest FR at both locations (p< 0.001). The only group with differences between the tested sites was the CC-A, the AR being more resistant (p< 0.001). Most CC-A and CF-A HPs failed cohesively. CF-R prostheses mainly failed adhesively. CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary HPs with short cantilevers (≤ 10 mm) made of Co-Cr or carbon-fiber veneered with acrylic resin demonstrated an adequate mechanical resistance (> 900 N). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: For maxillary HPs with cantilevers up to 10 mm, acrylic-veneered carbon- fiber mesostructures may be recommended, whereas coating carbon-fiber frames with composite resin seems not suitable.

Fracture resistance of cantilevered full-arch implant-supported hybrid prostheses with carbon fiber frameworks after thermal cycling.

OBJECTIVES: This in vitro study aimed to find the best combination of mesostructure and veneering materials for full-arch implant-supported hybrid prostheses (HPs) in terms of the fracture resistance (FR) of their cantilevers. METHODS: Three groups (n = 5 each) of maxillary HPs were fabricated: Group-1 (CC-A, control): Co-Cr frameworks coated with acrylic resin; Group-2 (CF-A): carbon fiber veneered with acrylic resin; and Group-3 (CF-R): carbon fiber coated with composite resin. All specimens were submitted to 5,000 thermal cycles (5 °C - 55 °C, dwell time: 30 s), and subjected to a single cantilever bending test in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 0.5 mm/min) until failure. The fracture pattern was assessed using stereo microscope and SEM. The one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni tests were run (α= 0.05). RESULTS: The FR yielded significant differences among the three groups (p< 0.001). CC-A samples reached the highest FR values (p ≤ 0.001), whereas both CF-A and CF-R HPs exhibited the comparably (p = 0.107) lowest FR. CC-A specimens failed cohesively (100%): mostly without chipping (80%). CF-A mesostructures were always broken at the connections of the distal implants. CF-R prostheses often failed adhesively (80%). CONCLUSIONS: The HPs made of Co-Cr veneered with acrylic demonstrated the best mechanical behavior, being the only group whose 13-mm long cantilevers exceeded the clinically acceptable FR of 900 N. The HPs constructed with carbon fiber frameworks showed, additionally, more unfavorable fracture patterns. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: For HPs with cantilevers up to 13 mm, Co-Cr mesostructures coated with acrylic may represent the optimum combination of materials.