2012
DOI: 10.4047/jap.2012.4.3.158
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanical analysis of conventional and small diameter conical implant abutments

Abstract: PURPOSE.The aim of the present study was to evaluate if a smaller morse taper abutment has a negative effect on the fracture resistance of implant-abutment connections under oblique compressive loads compared to a conventional abutment. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty morse taper conventional abutments (4.8 mm diameter) and smaller abutments (3.8 mm diameter) were tightened (20 Ncm) to their respective implants (3.5 × 11 mm) and after a 10 minute interval, implant/abutment assemblies were subjected to static com… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
25
1
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
1
25
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, Al-Omiri et al (22) described a mean of 577.9 N for maximum bite force in implant-supported prostheses. Moris et al (23) declared that the abutment deformation would not occur clinically under normal masticatory forces, mainly because of the protective forces of the crown over the abutment. The authors suggest the use of 4.5 mm diameter abutments in the molar region to avoid a possible mechanical complication.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, Al-Omiri et al (22) described a mean of 577.9 N for maximum bite force in implant-supported prostheses. Moris et al (23) declared that the abutment deformation would not occur clinically under normal masticatory forces, mainly because of the protective forces of the crown over the abutment. The authors suggest the use of 4.5 mm diameter abutments in the molar region to avoid a possible mechanical complication.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, the same abutment can be used for both cemented and screw-retained prostheses, providing freedom to choose the type of prosthesis retention after abutment installation, decreasing planning failures. Nevertheless, little is known about the behavior of this abutment (Moris et al 2012).…”
Section: Datementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The correlation between the implant diameter and fracture of the implant fixture has been reported to be low [15][16][17][18]. In this study, the number of cases was insufficient, but the diameter of the fractured implants varied in 2 cases by 3.8 mm, 3 cases by 4 mm, 5 cases by 4.5 mm, and 2 cases by 5 mm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%