Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 13, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Effect of different fabrication techniques on the fracture resistance of polyetheretherketone implant-supported
Aya Fawzy1, Mohamed Radawn2, Mazen A Attia3
1MSc student, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, Egypt.
Statement Of Problem:
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) can be adopted as a coping material for implant-supported crowns. However, data on the fracture resistance of PEEK implant-supported posterior crowns produced by different fabrication techniques are scarce.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of different fabrication techniques on the fracture resistance of PEEK implant-supported posterior crowns.
Material And Methods:
Thirty implants were placed in autopolymerizing acrylic resin blocks, with implant abutments positioned on each implant. Thirty PEEK copings were fabricated and assigned to 3 groups (n=10) depending on the fabrication technique: group MP, milled from a reinforced PEEK disk; group PP, heat pressed from PEEK granules; and group AMP, additively manufactured from PEEK filaments. All PEEK copings were veneered with a nanohybrid composite resin in the form of the maxillary right premolar. Then, a composite resin cement was used to cement the crowns to the implant abutments. All crowns underwent cyclic loading in a mastication simulator (1 200 000 cycles, 1.7 Hz, and 50 N). Fracture resistance was determined by using a universal testing machine, and the failure mode was recorded by using a stereomicroscope at ×15 magnification. A representative fractured crown from each group was assessed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) at ×1000 magnification. Data were analyzed by using 1-way analysis of variance and the pairwise Tukey (HSD) tests (α=.05).
Results:
No debonding, chipping, or fractures were detected after cyclic loading. The mean ±standard deviation fracture load values after cyclic loading were 1047 ±108 N for the MP group, 762 ±78 N for the PP group, and 647 ±65 N for the AMP group. Statistically significant differences in fracture resistance were observed among all groups (F=56.77, P<.001). For the failure mode, all groups exhibited 100% unfavorable failures, as coping fractures necessitated complete restoration replacement.
Conclusions:
The fabrication technique and material formulation influenced the fracture resistance of PEEK implant-supported posterior crowns. Milled PEEK implant-supported crowns exhibited significantly higher fracture resistance than heat-pressed or additively manufactured ones; however, all fabrication techniques produced fracture loads exceeding normal physiologic occlusal forces, regardless of differences in material formulation.
