Comparing the Fracture Resistance of Alternatively Engineered Zirconia Abutments with Original Equipment Manufactured Abutments with Different Implant Connection Designs

Jarman, Joseph; Hamalian, Techkouhie; Randi, Anthony

doi:10.11607/jomi.5236

Cited by 11 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The FEA results indicated that the maximum von Mises stress was higher in the aftermarket screws than it was in the OEM screws. This finding is in agreement with those of previous studies regarding aftermarket abutments 9 , 13 , 48 , 49 . Therefore, additional research and long-term clinical studies on the performance of aftermarket CAD/CAM screws are required to verify their reliability in clinical use.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…The failure mode involved deformation of the implant and abutment as well as fracture of the abutment and screw. Jarman et al 9 confirmed that the maximum load capacity of aftermarket Zr abutments was significantly lower than that of OEM Zr abutments. Kelly and Rungruanganunt 49 reported that OEM abutments (Straumann) outperformed aftermarket abutments (Atlantis) under cyclic loading, and they concluded that the differences in abutment design and fabrication between aftermarket and OEM manufacturers can significantly influence the clinical performance of the abutments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Therefore, in patients with the aforementioned risks, aftermarket screws should be cautiously used. We hope that manufacturers can enhance the accuracy of CAD/CAM for the clinical long-term success of implant prosthesis 9 , 13 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With advancements in computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) techniques in dentistry, clinicians can now choose prosthetic components, including abutments and screws, from the same manufacturer, which is known as the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) 9 . Several studies have reported that CAD/CAM technology can provide results comparable to those provided by conventional techniques in terms of implant survival, prosthesis survival, and technical and biologic complications 10 – 13 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Biomechanical effects of original equipment manufacturer and aftermarket abutment screws in zirconia abutment on dental implant assembly

Chen

Chang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of aftermarket computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) prosthesis components in dental implants has become popular. This study aimed to (1) compare the accuracy of aftermarket CAD/CAM screws with that of original equipment manufacturer (OEM) abutment screws and (2) examine the biomechanical effects of different abutment screws used with zirconia abutment in an implant fixture by using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA). Significantly different measurements were obtained for the aftermarket CAD/CAM and OEM screws. The FEA results indicated that under the same loading condition, the maximum stress of the aftermarket CAD/CAM screws was 15.9% higher than that of the OEM screws. Moreover, the maximum stress position occurred in a wide section of the OEM screws but in the narrowest section of the aftermarket screws. The stress of the OEM zirconia abutment was 14.9% higher when using the aftermarket screws than when using the OEM screws. The effect of the manufacturing differences between aftermarket and OEM screws on the clinical effect of aftermarket screws is unpredictable. Therefore, aftermarket screws should be cautiously used clinically.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Biomechanical effects of original equipment manufacturer and aftermarket abutment screws in zirconia abutment on dental implant assembly

Chen

Chang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although attempts are made to develop stable prosthetic interfaces (screw abutment and abutment implant), aftermarket manufacturers must alter abutment design to avoid patent infringement of the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). With limited research to support the mechanical validity of these design alterations, Jarman et al 236 followed an in vitro protocol to compare fracture resistance and failure mode of thirdparty CAD-CAM zirconia abutments with corresponding OEM zirconia abutments.…”

Section: Implant-assisted Fixed Prosthodonticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

Donovan

Marzola²,

Murphy³

et al. 2018

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2017, professional literature germane to the clinical practice of prosthodontics was published at an astounding rate. The annual content of over 50 professional journals was searched in its entirety to arrive at this review intended to provide readers with a general clinical update. For convenience, prosthodontics has been divided into 8 subtopics: general prosthodontic considerations, conventional removable complete prosthodontics, conventional removable partial prosthodontics, conventional fixed prosthodontics, general implant prosthodontic considerations, implant removable prosthodontics, implant-fixed prosthodontics, and prosthodontic materials. In addition to the articles selected for review, a sizable volume of excellent general reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and helpful clinical descriptive materials were also published on topics of prosthodontic interest. Although it would be impractical to provide detailed comments on this voluminous additional material, it is listed here for the reader's convenience: clinical processes, 1-7 anatomy and physiology, 8-20 biomechanics, 21 bruxism, 22-25 conventional complete dentures, 26-28 conventional fixed prosthodontics, 29-33 conventional removable partial prosthodontics, 34-36 diagnosis, 37-43 digital dentistry, 44-47

show abstract

Mechanical strength of stock and custom abutments as original and aftermarket components after thermomechanical aging

Pol,

Cune,

Raghoebar

et al. 2024

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe study aimed to assess the impact on the mechanical strength and failure patterns of implant‐abutment complexes of choosing different abutment types, designs and manufacturers, aiding in selecting the optimal restorative solution. Stock and custom abutments from original and aftermarket suppliers were subjected to thermomechanical aging.Material and MethodsStock and custom abutments from the implant manufacturer (original) and a aftermarket supplier (nonoriginal) were connected to identical implants with internal connection. Custom abutments were designed in a typical molar and premolar design, manufactured using the workflow from the respective suppliers. A total of 90 implants (4 mm diameter, 3.4 mm platform, 13 mm length) equally divided across 6 groups (three designs, two manufacturers) underwent thermo‐mechanical aging according to three different regimes, simulating five (n = 30) or 10 years (n = 30) of clinical function, or unaged control (n = 30). Subsequently, all samples were tested to failure.ResultsDuring aging, no failures occurred. The mean strength at failure was 1009N ± 171, showing significant differences between original and nonoriginal abutments overall (−230N ± 27.1, p < .001), and within each abutment type (p = .000), favoring original abutments. Aging did not significantly affect the failure load, while the type of abutment and manufacturer did, favoring original and custom‐designed abutments. The most common failure was implant bending or deformation, significantly differing between original and nonoriginal abutments and screws. All failure tests resulted in clinically unsalvageable implants and abutments.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, original abutments exhibited a higher mechanical strength compared to the nonoriginal alternative, regardless of the amount of simulated clinical use. Similarly, custom abutments showed higher mechanical strength compared to stock abutments. However, mechanical strength in all abutments tested was higher than average chewing forces reported in literature, thus components tested in this study can be expected to perform equally well in clinical situations without excessive force.

show abstract

Comparing the Fracture Resistance of Alternatively Engineered Zirconia Abutments with Original Equipment Manufactured Abutments with Different Implant Connection Designs

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Biomechanical effects of original equipment manufacturer and aftermarket abutment screws in zirconia abutment on dental implant assembly

Biomechanical effects of original equipment manufacturer and aftermarket abutment screws in zirconia abutment on dental implant assembly

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

Mechanical strength of stock and custom abutments as original and aftermarket components after thermomechanical aging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About