Assessing Microleakage at 2 Different Implant-Healing Abutment Interfaces
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 29, 2025
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
Soyeon Kim1, Joo Won Lee1, Jae-Heon Kim1
1Department of Oral Anatomy and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Objectives:
This study aimed to evaluate implants from different manufacturers and determine whether implant-healing abutment interface has a significant impact on implant seal.
Methods:
An air-injection pressure measurement test was performed on implants with either line-contact (modified TSIII [TSM] and Bone Level Tapered [BLT]) or partial face-contact (BlueDiamond [BD], SuperLine [SL], ISII, and UFII) interface design from 6 different manufacturers. Forty implants per implant type were analysed. Pressure data were evaluated with Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's post hoc analysis (statistical significance was set at P < .05).
Results:
BLT implants leaked when the mean pressure was increased to 199.9 kPa. The following implants showed mean leakage pressures of 182.9 (TSM), 157.4 (BD), 112.9 (SL), 101.8 (ISII), and 30.6 (UFII). There was a significant difference between line-contact and partial face-contact implants (P < .001).
Conclusions:
The implant interface design has a significant impact on implant microbial leakage. Implants with a line-contact interface exhibited a higher resistance to leakage than those with partial face-contact.
