Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 14, 2026
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
Comparative Evaluation of the Microleakage of Various Implant-Abutment Interface Designs: An In Vitro Study
Ushnik Mondal1, Anuj Bhargava2, Anip K Roy3
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences (KIDS), Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT) Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Aim:
The aim of this research was to assess the microleakage of three different implant-abutment interface designs.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 60 implants were used in this investigation. These were divided into three groups. i.e., 20 samples in each group as follows: group I-conical hex implant and abutment interface, group II-internal hexagon and abutment interface, and group III-Morse taper implant and abutment interface. Staphylococcus aureus was cultivated and incubated for 24 hours at 37°C to create a bacterial suspension in brain-heart infusion broth. The assembly was taken out after 2 weeks of S. aureus culture broth submersion and allowed to remain submerged in 70% alcohol for 3 minutes. Microbial evaluation was conducted to assess the microleakage of all the samples, and scanning electron microscope with a ×1,000 magnification was used to evaluate and record the microgaps. All data were recorded and statistically analyzed.
Results:
The least microleakage was found in conical hex implant and abutment interface group, i.e., 6.80 ± 2.58 followed by internal hexagon and abutment interface group (8.56 ± 3.14) and 10.24 ± 2.10 with Morse taper implant and abutment interface group. Statistically significant difference was obtained between different implant-abutment interface designs. The maximum gap was found in Morse taper implant and abutment interface group with a mean of 9.18 ± 1.62 followed by internal hexagon and abutment interface with a mean value of 7.98 ± 2.08 and conical hex implant and abutment interface group with a mean value of 7.30 ± 1.26. Statistically significant difference was obtained between different implant-abutment interface designs.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the implant abutment connection is susceptible to microleakage despite the connection design. But, implants with conical hex connections demonstrated less microleakage and microgaps than those with internal hexagon and Morse taper connection design implants.
Clinical Significance:
A microgap within the implant and abutment interface might be a source of microorganisms, affect clinical and histological parameters, cause inflammation, and potentially jeopardize osseointegration. As a result, knowing the components that work well together helps overcome treatment planning issues. By altering implant designs, implant-abutment connections, and procedures, several inventions are produced to reduce marginal bone loss. How to cite this article: Mondal U, Bhargava A, Roy AK, et al. Comparative Evaluation of the Microleakage of Various Implant-Abutment Interface Designs: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(8):776-779.
