Long-term stability of an injection-molded zirconia bone-level implant: A testing protocol considering aging kinetics and dynamic fatigue

Spies, Benedikt Christopher; Maass, Madeleine E.; Adolfsson, Erik; Sergo, Valter; Kiemle, Tobias; Berthold, Christoph; Gurian, Elisa; Fornasaro, Stefano; Vach, Kirstin; Kohal, Ralf‐Joachim

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2017.06.002

Cited by 21 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When only the fracture load [N] during static loading was reported, three options allowed for the calculation of the bending moment: (1) embedding was described to fully respect ISO 14801 (prescribing a lever arm of 5.5 mm allowing for the calculation of the bending moment), (2) all details regarding the embedding were provided in the manuscript (e.g., by providing a scheme) or (3) the bending moment and/or lever arm were provided by the authors upon request. As an example, six of the included studies adopted ISO 14801 for embedding [15,17,21,[24][25][26], whereas three provided all necessary information [19,27,28] allowing us to calculate the bending moment (embedding level, angulation, total sample length, point of loading). In the remaining cases the bending moment was reported [13,20,22] or sent by the authors [12,18,29,30].…”

Section: Screening Process/included Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These treatments included thermal aging (high-temperature conditions or thermal cycling) [15,16] and/or dynamic loading procedures (various exposure times and different applied loading modes) [12,17]. Zirconia implants evaluated regarding their fracture resistance in the literature comprised a heterogeneous range of features like material selection (yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal, Y-TZP or alumina-toughened zirconia, ATZ) [18], design (1-or 2-piece) [13], manufacturing (subtractive or by ceramic injection molding, CIM) [19], restoration (anatomical crown, hemisphere or no restoration) [20,21], abutment preparation (in the case of 1-piece implants) [22], or assembly (in the case of 2-piece implants) [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Screening Process/included Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Die Verwendung von keramischen Implantaten verringert das Risiko aufgrund einer korrosions-und abriebstabileren Oberfläche [4] und einer geringeren mikrobiellen Belagsadhäsion am Implantatdurchtritt zur Mukosa [6,7]. Die Stabilität von Keramikimplantaten, insbesondere aus ATZ-Keramik, sind für die klinische Anwendung inzwischen wissenschaftlich gut geprüft und mit der von Titanimplantaten vergleichbar [8]. Grundsätzlich spricht der ästhetische Vorteil aufgrund der hellen Farbe für alle Implantatrestaurationen im Frontbereich für sich [9].…”

Section: Fazitunclassified

Implantatversorgung mit ZERAMEX XT bei Autoimmunerkrankung: ein Fallbericht

Jacobi-Gresser¹

2020

ZWR - Das Deutsche Zahnärzteblatt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anamnestisch besteht seit etwas mehr als 20 Jahren eine Colitis ulcerosa (CU). Neben einer in diesem individuellen Fall erheblichen psychoemotionalen Belastung in der Kindheit und Jugend wird allgemein in der Literatur ein Zusammenwirken von mehreren fördernden Faktoren wie genetische Disposition und Umweltbelastung diskutiert, die zu einer Dysregulation des intestinalen Immunsystems führen [1].

show abstract

“…Inwiefern die LTD klinisch relevant ist, konnte bisher jedoch nicht abschließend geklärt werden. Erste Daten legen jedoch nahe, dass dieses Phänomen bei dentalen Implantaten zu vernachlässigen ist [41].…”

Section: Phasenumwandlung: Selbstheilung Oder Alterung?unclassified

“…In der aktuellen Literatur werden schlüssigere Versuchsaufbauten beschrieben, um die intraorale Langzeitbelastung im Labor möglichst realistisch zu simulieren [41,42]. Momentan gilt jedoch noch: Nicht jedes auf dem Markt befindliche Produkt muss langzeitstabil sein.…”

Section: Ist Die Sicherheit Garantiert?unclassified

Keramikimplantate: Was wissen wir?

Pieralli¹,

Kohal²,

Bruhnke³

et al. 2018

Zahnmedizin up2date

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ZusammenfassungIn der modernen Zahnmedizin bieten sich Keramikimplantate als Pfeiler für implantatgetragene Restaurationen an. Auch Patienten interessieren sich immer häufiger für metallfreie Versorgungen – sowohl bei der prothetischen Restauration („Was kommt auf mein Implantat?“) als auch bei der Wahl des Materials („Woraus besteht mein Implantat?“). Für den Behandler stellt sich daher die Frage: „Kann ich keramische Implantate bedenkenlos anbieten?“

show abstract

Long-term stability of an injection-molded zirconia bone-level implant: A testing protocol considering aging kinetics and dynamic fatigue

Cited by 21 publications

References 40 publications

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

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

Implantatversorgung mit ZERAMEX XT bei Autoimmunerkrankung: ein Fallbericht

Keramikimplantate: Was wissen wir?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About