Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 1, 2026
Measuring Maxillary Posterior Tooth Movement: A Model Assessment using Palatal and Dental Superimposition
Published on: February 23, 2024
Effect of engaging abutment position in implant-borne, screw-retained three-unit fixed cantilevered prostheses
Sitki M Dogus1, Kenneth S Kurtz, Ikuya Watanabe
1Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Division of Prosthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Bronx, NY 10467, USA.
Purpose:
To investigate the effects of internally connected engaging component position in screw-retained fixed cantilevered prostheses.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-one three-unit fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) were cast in high-palladium alloy in three groups. In group A, engaging components were incorporated into the units away from the cantilevered segment; proximal units received nonengaging components. In group B, these positions were reversed. Control specimens were fabricated using all nonengaging components. Specimens were attached to internally connected 3.5 (diameter) × 13 mm (length) implants, torqued to 32 Ncm, and embedded into epoxy resin. Specimens were tested in cyclic fatigue with a 2 Hz sine wave and 0.1 min/max load ratio. Load amplitude started at 1.8 N and increased by 1.8 N every 60 cycles until fracture. Log-rank statistic, ANOVA, Spearman's correlation, and LIFETEST procedures were used to evaluate level of statistical significance within the results.
Results:
In the control group, the mean number of cycles to fracture was 31,205 ± 2639. Mean axial force at fracture was 932 ± 78 N. In group A, these numbers were 38,160 ± 4292 and 1138 ± 128 N, and in group B, 31,810 ± 3408 and 949 ± 101 N. Statistical significance levels for number of cycles to fracture were: Control versus group A, p = 0.0117, and groups A versus B, p = 0.0156 (statistically significant). Control versus group B, p = 0.357 (not statistically significant). Log-rank statistic for the survival curves is greater than would be expected by chance; there was a statistically significant difference between survival curves (p = 0.012). The location and mode of failure were noteworthy (always in the abutment screw).
Conclusions:
The position of the engaging component had significant effects on the results. Within the limitations of this investigation, it can be concluded that using an engaging abutment in a screw-retained fixed cantilevered FDP provides a mechanical advantage, and engaging the implant furthest from the cantilever when designing a screw-retained cantilever FDP increased resistance to fracture of the distal abutment screw.