Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
In vitro assessment of PEEK and titanium implant abutments: Screw loosening and microleakage evaluations under dynamic mechanical testing.
Ortega-Martínez, Jordi; Delgado, Luis M; Ortiz-Hernández, Mónica; Punset, Miquel; Cano-Batalla, Jordi; Cayon, Miguel Roig; Cabratosa-Termes, Josep.
Afiliação
  • Ortega-Martínez J; Assistant Professor, School of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Delgado LM; Assistant Professor, Bioengineering Institute of Technology, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: lmdelgado@uic.es.
  • Ortiz-Hernández M; Technician, Biomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering group, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Barcelona, Spain.
  • Punset M; Technologist-in-charge, UPC Innovation and Technology Center (CIT-UPC), Barcelona, Spain.
  • Cano-Batalla J; Assistant Professor, School of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Cayon MR; Professor, School of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Cabratosa-Termes J; Associate Professor, School of Dentistry, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
J Prosthet Dent ; 127(3): 470-476, 2022 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33309211
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been advocated to replace metal components in dentistry. Although PEEK is a high-performance polymer with a white color, adequate biological response, and resistance to fracture, data to support PEEK as an alternative material for implant abutments are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the mechanical and functional properties of PEEK implant abutments as a nonmetallic alternative to titanium abutments, which presents esthetic limitations and greater difficulty to customize clinically. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Implant abutments manufactured by using PEEK (n=24) or titanium grade 5 (n=24) were attached to MIS Implants type M4 3.75×16 mm with an internal screw tightened to 25 Ncm. Screw loosening and microleakage was assessed by submersion in a 2% methylene blue solution for 48 hours at 37 °C. Both groups were compared with and without applying dynamic loading; fatigue testing was performed following the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14801:2016 standard. All specimens were observed under a stereomicroscope at ×8 magnification. Statistically significant differences among the PEEK and titanium implant abutments were tested with 2-factor ANOVA and the chi-square analysis for nonpaired and paired data, respectively (α=.05). RESULTS: The implant abutments made of titanium were better in all mechanical tests. The torque loss of titanium abutments was approximately 10%, while PEEK showed a significantly higher (P<.05) torque loss of up to 50%. Moreover, 91.6% of the titanium abutments did not present microleakage, while there was no specimen of PEEK abutments without microleakage, once subjected to dynamic loading (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Titanium implant abutments (Ti6Al4V) were better in all tests performed. However, PEEK abutments may be suitable for long-term interim restorations, especially in the anterior area, in patients without parafunction.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Titânio / Implantes Dentários Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Titânio / Implantes Dentários Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article