Fatigue and Fracture Resistance Testing of Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Implant Abutments in an Ex Vivo Chewing Simulator Model

Abstract

Polyether ether ketone (PEEK) has been introduced into implant dentistry as a viable alternative to current implant abutment materials. However, data on its physico-mechanical properties are still scarce. The present study sought to shed light on this topic utilizing an ex vivo chewing simulator model. A total of 48 titanium two-piece implants were allocated into three groups (n = 16 per group): (1) implants with PEEK abutments and an internal butt-joint connection (PBJ), (2) implants with PEEK abutments and an internal conical implant–abutment connection (PC), and (3) implants with zirconia abutments and an internal butt-joint connection (ZA). All abutments were restored with a non-precious metal alloy crown mimicking the upper right central incisor. A dynamic chewing simulation of half (n = 8) of the specimens per group was performed with 5 × 106 cycles and a load of 49 N at a frequency of 1.7 Hz with thermocycling between 5 and 55 °C. The other eight specimens served as unloaded controls. Surface roughness, implant–abutment connection microgaps (IACMs), and the titanium base–abutment interface microgaps (TAIMs) in the loaded groups were evaluated. Finally, a quasi-static loading test was performed in a universal testing machine with all samples to evaluate fracture resistance. Overall, 23 samples survived the artificial chewing process. One abutment screw fracture was observed in the PC group. The ZA group showed higher surface roughness values than PEEK abutments. Furthermore, ZA revealed lower TAIM values compared to PEEK abutments. Similarly, ZA was associated with lower IACM values compared to PBJ. Fracture loads/bending moments were 1018 N/704 N cm for PBJ, 966 N/676 N cm for PC, and 738 N/508 N cm for ZA, with no significant differences compared to the unloaded references. Artificial loading did not significantly affect fracture resistance of the examined materials. PEEK abutments were associated with better load-bearing properties than zirconia abutments, although they showed higher microgap values. PEEK abutments could, therefore, be feasible alternatives to zirconia abutments based on the present ex vivo findings resembling 20 years of clinical service.

Clinical Efficacy Analysis of the Personalization of Prosthetic Abutments in Implant Supported Restorations in Comparison to Available Standard Titanium Abutments

“…PEEK abutments have been introduced into implant dentistry as a viable alternative to current implant abutment materials [ 39 ]. Studies have indicated, firstly, that PEEK abutments should be used as a temporary abutment material [ 40 , 41 ].…”

“…Studies have indicated, firstly, that PEEK abutments should be used as a temporary abutment material [ 40 , 41 ]. Saravi in 2022 concluded that the application of PEEK can be used as a novel definitive implant abutment material, as PEEK abutments showed superior load-bearing properties compared to zirconia, although it was associated with greater microgaps at the implant–abutment complex [ 39 ].…”

Comparative Analysis of the Mechanical Properties and Biocompatibility between CAD/CAM and Conventional Polymers Applied in Prosthetic Dentistry

“…According to Ortega-Martínez et al, PEEK abutments may be used as a metal-free alternative to Titanium abutments for long-term interim restorations [99]. Based on the findings of Saravi et al, they can also be used as an alternative to Zirconia abutments [100]. PEEK implants induce less stress shielding than Titanium [101].…”

Characterization of the Polyetheretherketone Weldment Fabricated via Rotary Friction Welding

“…It was found that a maximum removal efficiency of about 99% was obtained. Saravi et al [13] studied the fatigue behavior of PEEK implant abutments. It was found that the PEEK implant abutments seem to be feasible, compared to zirconia implant abutments.…”