E.O. Almeida

Mechanical testing of implant-supported anterior crowns with different implant/abutment connections.

PURPOSE This study evaluated the reliability and failure modes of anterior implants with internal-hexagon (IH), external-hexagon (EH), or Morse taper (MT) implant-abutment interface designs. The postulated hypothesis was that the different implant-abutment connections would result in different reliability and failure modes when subjected to step-stress accelerated life testing (SSALT) in water. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty-three dental implants (4 × 10 mm) were divided into three groups (n = 21 each) according to connection type: EH, IH, or MT. Commercially pure titanium abutments were screwed to the implants, and standardized maxillary central incisor metallic crowns were cemented and subjected to SSALT in water. The probability of failure versus number of cycles (95% two-sided confidence intervals) was calculated and plotted using a power-law relationship for damage accumulation. Reliability for a mission of 50,000 cycles at 150 N (90% two-sided confidence intervals) was calculated. Polarized-light and scanning electron microscopes were used for failure analyses. RESULTS The beta values (confidence intervals) derived from use-level probability Weibull calculation were 3.34 (2.22 to 5.00), 1.72 (1.14 to 2.58), and 1.05 (0.60 to 1.83) for groups EH, IH, and MT, respectively, indicating that fatigue was an accelerating factor for all groups. Reliability was significantly different between groups: 99% for MT, 96% for IH, and 31% for EH. Failure modes differed; EH presented abutment screw fracture, IH showed abutment screw and implant fractures, and MT displayed abutment and abutment screw bending or fracture. CONCLUSIONS The postulated hypothesis that different implant-abutment connections to support anterior single-unit replacements would result in different reliability and failure modes when subjected to SSALT was accepted.

Regular and Platform Switching: Bone Stress Analysis Varying Implant Type

PURPOSE This study aimed to evaluate stress distribution on peri-implant bone simulating the influence of platform switching in external and internal hexagon implants using three-dimensional finite element analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Four mathematical models of a central incisor supported by an implant were created: External Regular model (ER) with 5.0 mm × 11.5 mm external hexagon implant and 5.0 mm abutment (0% abutment shifting), Internal Regular model (IR) with 4.5 mm × 11.5 mm internal hexagon implant and 4.5 mm abutment (0% abutment shifting), External Switching model (ES) with 5.0 mm × 11.5 mm external hexagon implant and 4.1 mm abutment (18% abutment shifting), and Internal Switching model (IS) with 4.5 mm × 11.5 mm internal hexagon implant and 3.8 mm abutment (15% abutment shifting). The models were created by SolidWorks software. The numerical analysis was performed using ANSYS Workbench. Oblique forces (100 N) were applied to the palatal surface of the central incisor. The maximum (σ(max)) and minimum (σ(min)) principal stress, equivalent von Mises stress (σ(vM)), and maximum principal elastic strain (ε(max)) values were evaluated for the cortical and trabecular bone. RESULTS For cortical bone, the highest stress values (σ(max) and σ(vm) ) (MPa) were observed in IR (87.4 and 82.3), followed by IS (83.3 and 72.4), ER (82 and 65.1), and ES (56.7 and 51.6). For ε(max), IR showed the highest stress (5.46e-003), followed by IS (5.23e-003), ER (5.22e-003), and ES (3.67e-003). For the trabecular bone, the highest stress values (σ(max)) (MPa) were observed in ER (12.5), followed by IS (12), ES (11.9), and IR (4.95). For σ(vM), the highest stress values (MPa) were observed in IS (9.65), followed by ER (9.3), ES (8.61), and IR (5.62). For ε(max) , ER showed the highest stress (5.5e-003), followed by ES (5.43e-003), IS (3.75e-003), and IR (3.15e-003). CONCLUSION The influence of platform switching was more evident for cortical bone than for trabecular bone, mainly for the external hexagon implants. In addition, the external hexagon implants showed less stress concentration in the regular and switching platforms in comparison to the internal hexagon implants.

Recovering the function and esthetics of fractured teeth using several restorative cosmetic approaches. Three clinical cases.

The teeth most commonly affected by trauma are the maxillary central incisors. The most frequent types of traumatic dental injuries to permanent teeth are enamel fractures, enamel and dentine fractures, and enamel and dentine fractures with pulp involvement. This article describes three clinical cases with different levels of traumatized maxillary incisors and several cosmetic approaches for recovery of the esthetics and the masticatory function, as well as the social/psychological aspects of treatment. All cases involved young adult men. The three clinical cases involve dentin and enamel fractures, dentin and enamel fractures with pulp exposure, and dentin and enamel fractures with pulp exposure associated with root fracture. The cosmetic treatments used to resolve fractures were direct composite resin by layering technique, indirect all-ceramic restorations (laminate veneer and ceramic crowns over the teeth), and immediate implant after extraction followed by immediate loading (ceramic abutments with ceramic crown over implant). In all three cases, excellent functional and esthetic results were achieved by use of these treatment modalities. The patients were very satisfied with the results.

Critical aspects for mechanical simulation in dental implantology

Dental implants have been widely used for the rehabilitation of completely and partially edentulous patients. (Branemark et al. 1969; Branemark et al. 1977; Adell et al. 1990; van Steenberghe et al. 1990) Despite the high success rates reported by a vast number of clinical studies, early or late implant failures are still unavoidable. (Esposito et al. 1998) Mechanical complications and failures have frequently been reported during prosthetic treatment. (Roberts 1970; Randow et al. 1986; Walton et al. 1986; Levine et al. 1999)