Influence of the use of transepithelial abutments vs. titanium base abutments on microgap formation at the dental implant–abutment interface: an in vitro study

This in vitro study aimed to assess the presence of microgaps at the implant-abutment interface in monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed prostheses on transepithelial abutments versus Ti-base abutments.Methods: Sixty conical connection dental implants were divided into two groups (n =...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Cascos, Rocio, Celemín Viñuela, María Del Pilar Alicia, Mory Rubiños, Nataly, Gómez Polo, Cristina, Ortega, Rocio, Agustín Panadero, Rubén, Gómez Polo, Miguel Ángel
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2023
País:España
Institución:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
Repositorio:Docta Complutense
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/103638
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/103638
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:616.314-089.843
616.314-089.28
Dental implants
Dental abutments
Dental implant–abutment design
Dental prosthesis
Implant-supported
Scanning electron microscopy
Implantes dentales
Aparatos y material odontológicos
3299 Otras Especialidades Médicas
3314 Tecnología Médica
Descripción
Sumario:This in vitro study aimed to assess the presence of microgaps at the implant-abutment interface in monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed prostheses on transepithelial abutments versus Ti-base abutments.Methods: Sixty conical connection dental implants were divided into two groups (n = 30). The control group consisted of three-unit bridge monolithic zirconia connected to two implants by a transepithelial abutment. The test group consisted of monolithic zirconia three-unit restoration connected to two implants directly by a titanium base (Ti-base) abutment. The sample was subjected to thermocycling (10,000 cycles at 5 degrees C to 55 degrees C, dwelling time 50 s) and chewing simulation (300,000 cycles, under 200 N at frequencies of 2 Hz, at a 30 degrees angle). The microgap was evaluated at six points (mesiobuccal, buccal, distobuccal, mesiolingual, lingual, and distolingual) of each implant-abutment interface by using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U tests (p > 0.05).Results: The SEM analysis showed a smaller microgap at the implant-abutment interface in the control group (0.270 mu m) than in the test group (3.902 mu m). Statistically significant differences were observed between both groups (p < 0.05).Conclusions: The use or not of transepithelial abutments affects the microgap size. The transepithelial abutments group presented lower microgap values at the interface with the implant than the Ti-base group in monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed prostheses. However, both groups had microgap values within the clinically acceptable range.