Chewing simulation of zirconia implant supported restorations

In Vitro Investigation of Material Combinations for Meso- and Suprastructures in a Biomimetic Approach to Restore One-Piece Zirconia Implants

The aim of this study was to find a suitable material combination to avoid cement excess in the marginal region of one-piece zirconia implant-supported restorations by means of a hybrid crown consisting of a meso- and a suprastructure. One-piece zirconia implants (n = 120) were embedded in epoxy resin. Microfilled resin composite mesostructures (n = 60), designed as caps, were bonded on the implant abutment with a primer only. A molar crown was constructed and cemented with a resin cement on top of the mesostructure as a suprastructure out of feldspar ceramic (n = 12), lithium-disilicate (n = 24), or zirconia (n = 24). Fracture load (n = 6) and retention force (n = 6) were measured immediately after storage in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h, as well as after an additional exposure to artificial aging in a chewing simulator and simultaneous thermal cycling. For the measurement of the fracture load, monolithic crowns made of the employed restorative materials and identical in shape to the hybrid crowns served as controls (n = 6 each). Fracture load values for feldspar ceramic and lithium-disilicate hybrid crowns were slightly higher than those for the respective monolithic crowns at baseline and after aging, which was statistically significant only for feldspar crowns after aging. In contrast, fracture load values for zirconia monolithic crowns were higher than those for zirconia hybrid crowns, which was only statistically significant after aging. Artificial aging reduced the fracture load of feldspar and lithium-disilicate crowns both for hybrid and monolithic crowns. The effect was only statistically significant for lithium disilicate hybrid crowns. The fracture load for hybrid and monolithic zirconia crowns was increased by artificial aging without reaching statistical significance. The retention force of lithium-disilicate and zirconia hybrid crowns was not affected by artificial aging. Taking into account retention force and fracture load, lithium-disilicate hybrid crowns showed promising results.

Influence of Surface Treatment and Accelerated Ageing on Biaxial Flexural Strength and Hardness of Zirconia

The aim was to investigate how the surface treatment and the process of accelerated ageing of zirconia for dental implants affect the biaxial flexural strength and hardness. Zirconia discs with a diameter of 12.6 mm were subjected to either one of the following treatments: polishing (Zp); polishing and heat treatment at 1250 °C for 1 h (Zpt); machining (Zm); machining and heat treatment (Zmt); or sandblasting, acid-etching, and heat treatment (Z14) (n = 45 per group). Biaxial flexural strength and Martens hardness (HM) were measured without further treatment and after accelerated ageing for 5 h or 5 × 5 h according to ISO 13356 (n = 15 per group). Two-way ANOVA was applied to test the effect of surface treatment and ageing (α = 0.05). The reliability of the specimens was described with Weibull two-parameter distribution of biaxial flexural strength data. Overall, the surface treatment (p < 0.001) and ageing (p = 0.012) revealed a significant effect on biaxial flexural strength values, while HM was only affected by the surface treatment (p < 0.001) but not ageing (p = 0.160). Surface treatment significantly affected HM (p < 0.001) but not ageing (p = 0.160). The applied surface treatments affected the biaxial flexural strength and HM of zirconia. For accelerated ageing, a duration of both 5 h and 5 × 5 h is recommended to evaluate the effect of surface treatments. Zm was the most reliable surface as it was least affected by ageing and provided low standard deviations of biaxial flexural strength values.

Fatigue resistance and fracture strength of narrow-diameter one-piece zirconia implants with angled abutments

OBJECTIVE

Zirconia implants are assumed to satisfy the esthetic requirements that titanium implants cannot meet, however, there are not enough studies in the literature about narrow-diameter and angled zirconia implants that can be preferred especially in the anterior region. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the fatigue resistance and fracture strength of narrow-diameter zirconia implants with angled abutments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-eight one-piece experimental zirconia implants and monolithic zirconia crowns were produced from 3-YTZP blanks. The implant diameters (3.0 or 3.7 mm) and the restoration types were determined according to three intraoral regions (upper central incisors, lower central incisors, and upper canine), and abutments were designed as straight or 15° angled. The samples were subjected to chewing simulation corresponding to 5 years of clinical performance and then the static loading test. The survival rates of groups were measured by the Kaplan-Meier log-rank test, and the fracture load values were estimated by using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

All 3.0 mm diameter implants failed the fatigue test. The fatigue resistance of the implants with angled abutments was significantly lower than the straight abutments, and different crown designs were found to affect survival rates significantly. The fracture strengths of the surviving groups were above the maximum physiological chewing forces, and the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The implant diameter, abutment angle, and restoration type have a significant effect on the fatigue behavior of zirconia implants.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The fracture strengths of the one-piece zirconia implants with a 3.7 mm diameter and a 15° abutment angle are above the chewing forces for the anterior intraoral region.

Clinical outcomes of all-ceramic single crowns and fixed dental prostheses supported by ceramic implants: A systematic review and meta-analyses

Objective

To analyze the clinical outcomes of all‐ceramic single crowns (SCs) and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) supported by ceramic implants.

Materials and Methods

Based on a focused question and customized PICO framework, electronic (Medline/EMBASE/Cochrane) and manual searches for studies reporting the clinical outcomes of all‐ceramic SCs and FDPs supported by ceramic implants ≥12 months were performed. The primary outcomes were reconstruction survival and the chipping proportion. The secondary outcomes were implant survival, technical complications, and patient‐related outcome measurements. Meta‐analyses were performed after 1, 2, and 5 years using random‐effect meta‐analyses.

Results

Eight of the 1,403 initially screened titles and 55 full texts were included. Five reported on monolithic lithium disilicate (LS2) SCs, one on veneered zirconia SCs, and two on veneered zirconia SCs and FDPs, which reported all on cement‐retained reconstructions (mean observation: 12.0–61.0 months). Meta‐analyses estimated a 5‐year survival rate of 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 82%–100%) for overall implant survival. Reconstruction survival proportions after 5 years were: monolithic LS2, 100% (95%CI: 95%–100%); veneered zirconia SCs, 89% (95%CI: 62%–100%); and veneered zirconia FDPs 94% (95%CI: 81%–100%). The chipping proportion after 5 years was: monolithic LS2, 2% (95%CI: 0%–11%); veneered zirconia SCs, 38% (95%CI: 24%–54%); and veneered zirconia FDPs, 57% (95%CI: 38%–76%). Further outcomes were summarized descriptively.

Conclusions

Due to the limited data available, only tendencies could be identified. All‐ceramic reconstructions supported by ceramic implants demonstrated promising survival rates after mid‐term observation. However, high chipping proportions of veneered zirconia SCs and, particularly, FDPs diminished the overall outcome. Monolithic LS2 demonstrated fewer clinical complications. Monolithic reconstructions could be a valid treatment option for ceramic implants.

Fracture Resistance of Single-Unit Implant-Supported Crowns: Effects of Prosthetic Design and Restorative Material

PURPOSE

To evaluate the fracture resistance and fracture patterns of single implant-supported crowns with different prosthetic designs and materials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and forty-four identical crowns were fabricated from zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS), leucite-based (LGC), and lithium disilicate (LDS) glass-ceramics, reinforced composite (RC), translucent zirconia (ZR), and ceramic-reinforced polyetheretherketone (P). These crowns were divided into 3 subgroups according to restoration design: cementable crowns on a prefabricated titanium abutment, cement-retained crown on a zirconia-titanium base abutment, and screw-cement crown (n = 8). After adhesive cementation, restorations were subjected to thermal-cycling and loaded until fracture. The fracture patterns were evaluated under a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis was performed by using 2-way ANOVA/Bonferroni multiple comparison post hoc test (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

For each prosthetic design, ZR presented the highest fracture resistance (p ≤ 0.005). Other than the differences with ZLS and RC for screw-cement crowns (p > 0.05) and RC for crowns on zirconia-titanium base abutments (p > 0.05), LGC showed the lowest fracture resistance. P endured higher loads than LDS (p < 0.001), except for the crowns on zirconia-titanium base abutments (p > 0.05). Cementable crowns presented the highest fracture resistance (p < 0.001), other than LGC and LDS. The differences between LGC crowns (p > 0.05) or LDS crowns on prefabricated titanium and zirconia-titanium abutments were nonsignificant (p = 0.133). Fragmented crown fracture was predominant in most of the restorations. Screw and abutment fractures were observed in ZR screw-cement crowns, and all P crowns were separated from the abutments.

CONCLUSIONS

Restorative material and restoration design affect the fracture resistance and fracture pattern of implant-supported single-unit restorations. Clinicians may restore single-unit implants in premolar sites with the materials and prosthetic designs tested in the present study.

In Vitro Investigations in a Biomimetic Approach to Restore One-Piece Zirconia Implants

The objective of this study was to evaluate the fracture load and retention force of different bonding systems while restoring one-piece zirconia implants with a novel cementation approach using a mesostructure. Polymer-infiltrated ceramic mesostructures (n = 112) were therefore designed as caps on the implant abutment, and a molar feldspathic ceramic crown was constructed on top of it as a suprastructure. For cementation, different bonding systems were used. Fracture load and retention force were measured immediately after storage in water at 37 °C for 24 h (n = 8) as well as after artificial aging in a chewing simulator and subsequent thermal cycling (n = 8). Combined restorations showed higher fracture load compared to monolithic restorations of polymer-infiltrated ceramic (n = 8) or feldspathic ceramic (n = 8) identical in shape. However, the fracture load of the combined restorations was significantly affected by aging, independent of the primers and cements used. Restorations cemented with primers containing methyl methacrylate and 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate exhibited the highest retention force values. Aging did not affect the retention force significantly. Similar fracture load values can be expected from combination restorations when compared with monolithic crowns.

Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to examine the retention force of monolithic zirconia copings cemented with various temporary cements on implant abutments in vitro.

Methods

Sixty exercise implants with pre-screwed implant abutments were embedded in resin. Subsequently, 60 CAD/CAM manufactured zirconia copings were divided into three main groups [Harvard Implant Semi-permanent (HAV), implantlink semi Forte (IMP), Temp Bond NE (TBNE)]. The zirconia copings were cemented on the implant abutments and loaded with 35 N. Specimens were stored in distilled water (37 °C) for 24 h. Half of the test specimens of each group were subjected to a thermocycling (TC) process. Retention force was measured in a universal testing machine. Using magnifying glasses, the fracture mode was determined. Statistical analysis was performed applying the Kruskal-Wallis test, the post hoc test according to Dunn-Bonferroni and a chi-square test of independence.

Results

Without TC, IMP showed the highest retention of the three temporary luting agents (100.5 ± 39.14 N). The measured retention forces of IMP were higher than those of HAV (45.78 ± 15.66 N) and TBNE (61.16 ± 20.19 N). After TC, retention was reduced. IMP showed the greatest retentive strength (21.69 ± 13.61 N, three fail outs). HAV and TBNE showed pull-off forces of similar magnitude (17.38 ± 12.77 N and 16.97 ± 12.36 N, two fail outs). The fracture mode analysis showed different results regarding the tested cements before and after TC (facture type before/after TC): IMP (III+II/III), HAV (I/II) and TBNE (III/III). There were clear differences of the fracture modes regarding the examination before and after TC.

Conclusions

Within the limits of this study, IMP showed the highest pull-off forces under the chosen test conditions. All three temporary luting agents showed lower retention forces after TC. Retention values in the individual cement classes were very heterogeneous. Easy cement removal in the crown lumen favours the dominance of adhesive cement fractures on the abutment and adhesive/cohesive cement fractures on the abutment with HAV appears advantageous in case of recementation of the superstructure.

Failure Load and Fatigue Behavior of Monolithic Translucent Zirconia, PICN and Rapid-Layer Posterior Single Crowns on Zirconia Implants

This laboratory study aimed to evaluate the thermo-mechanical fatigue behavior and failure modes of monolithic and rapid-layer posterior single-crowns (SCs) supported by zirconia implants. Methods: 120 all-ceramic crowns supported by one-piece zirconia implants (ceramic.implant; vitaclinical) were divided into five groups (n = 24 each): Group Z-HT: 3Y-TZP monolithic-zirconia (Vita-YZ-HT); Group Z-ST: 4Y-TZP monolithic-zirconia (Vita-YZ-ST); Z-XT: 5Y-TZP monolithic-zirconia (Vita-YZ-XT); Group E: monolithic-polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN,Vita-Enamic); Group RL (rapid layer): PICN-“table-top” (Vita-Enamic), 3Y-TZP-framework (Vita-YZ-HT). Half of the specimens of each group (n = 12) were exposed to fatigue with cyclic mechanical loading (F = 198N, 1.2-million cycles) and simultaneous thermocycling (5–55 °C). Single-load-to-failure testing (Z010, Zwick) was performed for all specimens without/with fatigue application. Data analysis was performed using ANOVA, Tukey’s post-hoc test, two-sample t-test and Bonferroni correction (p < 0.05). Results: All specimens survived fatigue exposure. Significant differences in failure loads were detected among groups (p ≤ 0.004). Materials Z-HT and Z-ST showed the highest failure loads followed by Z-XT, RL and E. The influence of fatigue was only significant for material RL. Conclusions: All types of tested materials exceeded clinically acceptable failure load values higher than 900N and can be recommended for clinical use. Z-HT and Z-ST appear to be highly reliable towards fatigue. Rapid-layer design of PICN and YZ-HT might be an interesting treatment concept for posterior implant SCs.

Fracture load of zirconia implant supported CAD/CAM resin crowns and mechanical properties of restorative material and cement

PURPOSE

To test if resin CAD/CAM materials should be considered for zirconia implants and how their mechanical properties affect the fracture load.

METHODS

Fracture load of molar crowns of CAD/CAM materials (VITA CAD-Temp [CT], Cerasmart [CS], Lava Ultimate [LU], Pekkton Ivory [PK]) on zirconia implants (ceramic.implant, 4.0 mm) fixed either with no cement, temporary cement (Harvard Implant semi-permanent [HIS]), self-adhesive (VITA Adiva S-Cem [VAS]) or either one of two adhesive cements (Multilink Automix [MLA], VITA Adiva F-Cem [VAF]) was analyzed. The restorative materials were characterized by their flexural strength, fracture toughness, elemental composition and organic/inorganic ratio while compressive strength of the cements was measured.

RESULTS

For the fracture load significantly highest mean values were fo und overall for PK (2921 ±300 N) > LU (2017 ±499 N) > CS (1463 ±367 N) = CT (1451 ±327 N) (p > 0.05). When analyzing the effect of the cement on the fracture load the overall ranking was VAF (2245 ±650 N) ≥ MLA (2188 ±708 N) ≥ VAS (2017 ±563 N) > HIS (1757 ±668 N) = no cement (1595 ±757 N) (p <0.05), meaning fracture load increased with the compressive strength of the cements. Additionally, a linear trend was found between the fracture load and the fracture toughness of the restorative materials.

CONCLUSIONS

All restorative materials exhibited fracture load values similar or higher than lithium disilicate tested previously. Fracture load of CT, CS and LU can be significantly increased when an adhesive cement with a high compressive strength is used.

Stability of screw-retention in two-piece zirconia implants: An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the stability of a screw-retained connection in a novel two-piece zirconia implant to a conventional titanium-based connection in an in vitro chewing simulation including artificial ageing.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Incisor (I) and molar (M) shaped monolithic zirconia crowns were screw-retained on either two-piece zirconia (test) or two-piece titanium (control) implants resulting in 4 groups of 8 samples (titanium implants with incisor-shaped crowns (T-I), titanium implants with molar-shaped crowns (T-M), zirconia implants with incisor-shaped crowns (Z-I) and zirconia implants with molar-shaped crowns (Z-M). These were subjected to artificial ageing by thermal cycling (TC: 2 × 3000 × 5°C/55°C cycles of 2 min) and mechanical loading (ML: 1.2 × 10⁶ cycles of 50 N, f = 1 Hz). Surviving samples additionally underwent a fracture force test. Kaplan-Meier plots were drawn, and two-way ANOVA was calculated taking anatomical localisation and material variables as factors.

RESULTS

The mean corresponding survival times were lower for T-M (0.86 × 10⁶  ± 0.31 × 10⁶ cycles) and Z-I (0.84 × 10⁶  ± 0.21 × 10⁶ cycles) compared to T-I (1.14 × 10⁶  ± 0.10 × 10⁶ cycles) and Z-M (1.20 × 10⁶  ± 0.10 × 10⁶ cycles). In one-way ANOVAs for survival time dependent on either location or material, no statistically significant differences could be found (location: p = .31; material: p = .62) in one-way ANOVAs. The interaction of location and material showed significant differences (F = 21.3, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The connection of the tested screw-retained zirconia crowns in two-piece zirconia implants is comparable to standard titanium implants in the specific in vitro testing.

Fracture Resistance of Zirconia Oral Implants In Vitro: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Various protocols are available to preclinically assess the fracture resistance of zirconia oral implants. The objective of the present review was to determine the impact of different treatments (dynamic loading, hydrothermal aging) and implant features (e.g., material, design or manufacturing) on the fracture resistance of zirconia implants. An electronic screening of two databases (MEDLINE/Pubmed, Embase) was performed. Investigations including > 5 screw-shaped implants providing information to calculate the bending moment at the time point of static loading to fracture were considered. Data was extracted and meta-analyses were conducted using multilevel mixed-effects generalized linear models (GLMs). The Šidák method was used to correct for multiple testing. The initial search resulted in 1864 articles, and finally 19 investigations loading 731 zirconia implants to fracture were analyzed. In general, fracture resistance was affected by the implant design (1-piece > 2-piece, p = 0.004), material (alumina-toughened zirconia/ATZ > yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal/Y-TZP, p = 0.002) and abutment preparation (untouched > modified/grinded, p < 0.001). In case of 2-piece implants, the amount of dynamic loading cycles prior to static loading (p < 0.001) or anatomical crown supply (p < 0.001) negatively affected the outcome. No impact was found for hydrothermal aging. Heterogeneous findings of the present review highlight the importance of thoroughly and individually evaluating the fracture resistance of every zirconia implant system prior to market release.