Effect of fatigue loading and failure mode of different ceramic implant abutments

Currently many options are available for restoring a dental implant, although the ideal implant abutment for withstanding the occlusal load and the restorative material for fulfilling the esthetic need remains unclear. Zirconia (Zir) abutments offer good esthetics, but concerns still remain regarding their fracture strength, complex fabrication, and higher cost as compared with those of titanium (Ti) base abutments offering lower cost, acceptable esthetics, and a straightforward procedure.

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the fracture strength and failure mode of single-tooth Zir and Ti base implant abutments with fatigue loading.

Forty restorations were included using 4 different types of abutment-restorations. Zir abutments with lithium disilicate crowns (ZirLd); titanium base abutments with custom Zir abutments and lithium disilicate crowns (TiZirLd); titanium base abutments with monolithic lithium disilicate abutment-crowns (TiLd); titanium base abutments with monolithic polymer-infiltrated ceramic abutment-crowns (TiEn). Specimens were subjected to a progressive cyclic loading by using a custom-made mastication simulator at a frequency of 1.4 Hz starting with a load of 88 N followed by stages of 170, 210, 250, and 290 N for a maximum of 20 000 cycles each or until fracture occurred. The number of cycles, maximum load, and failure modes were recorded. Statistical analysis was done by using the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05).

Group TiEn showed a lower resistance to fatigue, with a mean ±standard deviation of 5054 ±123.3 cycles subjected to a mean force of 170 N. Groups ZirLd and TiLd resisted higher forces without fracture 13452.6 ±7094.3 cycles, and load of 178 ±16.9 N, followed by the TiLd group with a mean ±standard deviation of 25798.6 ±5498.7 cycles, and load of 202 ±16.9 N, while the TiZirLd group showed a mean of 48235.4 cycles subjected to a mean force of 258 N. The failure mode observed in the TiEn occurred only in the ceramic, whereas in the ZirLd and TiLd group, it was above the shoulder level of the Ti base abutment. Even though the TiZirLd group was able to withstand higher loads and a higher number of cycles, the failures were catastrophic and presented fractures of the titanium-base abutment and prosthetic screw.

The TiZirLd, ZirLd, and TiLd abutment-restorations have the potential to withstand the average physiological occlusal forces that occur in the anterior region. The group with the higher fatigue resistance was TiZirLd, although care should be taken with patients presenting parafunctional habits since the failure mode can be catastrophic. Also, polymer-infiltrated ceramic is not suitable for a Ti base abutment when subjected to oblique loading.