Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 26, 2025
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Effect of materials on axial displacement and internal discrepancy of cement-retained implant-supported prostheses
Kyung-Ho Ko1, Yoon-Hyuk Huh2, Chan-Jin Park3
1Assistant professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Research Institute of Oral Science, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, Republic of Korea.
Statement Of Problem:
How axial displacement may be affected by the mechanical properties and internal discrepancy of a cement-retained implant-supported prosthesis is unclear.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the difference in internal discrepancy and axial displacement according to the prosthesis material in cement-retained prostheses splinting nonparallel implants.
Material And Methods:
Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacture (CAD-CAM) titanium abutments were fabricated for a vertically placed implant and a 15-degree tilted implant. Three types of prostheses, in zirconia, cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) alloy, and polymethylmethacrylate resin (PMMA), were fabricated (n=10). The internal discrepancy between the CAD-CAM titanium abutment and the prosthesis was measured by using the replica technique. After luting with an interim cement, they were mounted in Type IV gypsum. The specimens were cyclic loaded, and axial displacement of the prosthesis was measured after 3, 10, 100, and 106 cycles. The internal discrepancy and cumulative axial displacement were assessed by using a 3-way analysis of variance and repeated measures analysis of variance (α=.05).
Results:
The internal discrepancy of the prosthesis did not differ based on the prosthesis material (P=.869); however, it was significantly different based on the measurement location, with the occlusal discrepancy (224 ±29 μm) being greater than the axial discrepancy (21 ±10 μm) (P<.05). Implants with an angled placement exhibited less axial displacement than implants with vertical placement (P<.05). The PMMA prosthesis demonstrated significantly greater axial displacement than the zirconia or Co-Cr prostheses (P<.05), which were similar (P=.623).
Conclusions:
Prostheses made with high-elastic moduli materials exhibited less axial displacement than PMMA prostheses, even though the internal discrepancy was not different. Moreover, vertically placed implants presented a greater axial displacement of the prosthesis than implants with angled placement.
