Modern Approaches in Choosing Materials for Implant Supported Prosthesis

Abstract:

The materials used in manufacturing the implant supported prosthesis may influence the occlusal stress distribution to the bone due to their different elastic modulus. Thus, compared with alloys of Co-Cr, the material currently used for the realization of the implant supported prosthesis’ resistance structure, the titanium prosthesis’ elasticity allows a less rigid solidarization, especially important as the extent of the bridge is greater, more so in the mandible, which presents an elastic deformation during mastication.The use of modern composite materials based on polyether-ether-ketones for manufacturing the implant supported prosthesis’ resistance structure is gaining more and more interest due to optimization opportunities of the distribution of masticatory forces around the implant.Regarding the aesthetic component of the implant supported prosthesis, ceramic masses remain the most commonly used materials due to their outstanding restorer options and proven biocompatibility. However, speaking of the transmission of forces to the implant support, the composite materials are preferred due to advantages related to the possibility of stress relief and to ensure a durable link frame - composite, the aesthetic result being more than satisfying.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 638)
• Pages: 243-248
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.638.243
• Online since: March 2015
• Authors: Horia Octavian Manolea, Adrian Fronie, Sanda Mihaela Popescu, Mirela Opri, Eduard Ciucă
• Keywords: Dental Ceramics, Implant Supported Prosthesis, Polyether-Ether-Ketones (PEEK), Titanium

References

[1] Bacchi A, Consani RL, Mesquita MF, dos Santos MB. Stress distribution in fixed-partial prosthesis and peri-implant bone tissue with different framework materials and vertical misfit levels: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Oral Sci. 2013 Sep; 55(3): 239-44.

DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.55.239

[2] Pesqueira AA, Goiato MC, Filho HG, Monteiro DR, Santos DM, Haddad MF, Pellizzer EP., Use of stress analysis methods to evaluate the biomechanics of oral rehabilitation with implants. J Oral Implantol. 2014 Apr; 40(2): 217-28.

DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-d-11-00066

[3] HK Kim, SJ Heo, JY Koak, SK Kim. In vivo comparison of force development with various materials of implant-supported prostheses Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2009; 36: 616-25.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.01972.x

[4] Branemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 50: 399-410.

[5] Abduo J, Bennani V, Waddell N, Lyons K, Swain M. Assessing the fit of implant fixed prostheses: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25: 506-15.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02019.x

[6] Schwarz M. Mechanical complications of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11: 156–8.

[7] Escalante R. Management of occlusion over implants, part 1: three 10-year case follow-ups and evaluations. Dent Today. 2013; 32: 106-111.

[8] Bal BT, Cağlar A, Aydin C, Yilmaz H, Bankoğlu M, Eser A. Finite element analysis of stress distribution with splinted and nonsplinted maxillary anterior fixed prostheses supported by zirconia or titanium implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Jan-Feb; 28(1): e27-38.

DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2442

[9] Sannino G, Marra G, Feo L, G Vairo, Barlattani A. 3D finite element non linear analysis on the stress state at bone-implant interface in dental osteointegrated implants. Oral Implantol (Rome). 2010 Jul; 3(3): 26-37.

[10] Jorge JR, Barão VA, Delben JA, Faverani LP, Queiroz TP, Assunção WG. Titanium in dentistry: historical development, state of the art and future perspectives. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2013 Jun; 13(2): 71-7.

DOI: 10.1007/s13191-012-0190-1

[11] Lin MC, Tung KL, Lin SC, Huang HH. Bonding of dental porcelain to non-cast titanium with different surface treatments. Dent Mater J. 2012; 31(6): 933-40.

DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2012-073

[12] Almilhatti HJ, Neppelenbroek KH, Vergani CE, Machado AL, Pavarina AC, Giampaolo ET. Adhesive bonding of resin composite to various titanium surfaces using different metal conditioners and a surface modification system. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013 Nov-Dec; 21(6): 590-6.

DOI: 10.1590/1679-775720130255

[13] Haag P, Nilner K. Bonding between titanium and dental porcelain: a systematic review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2010 May; 68(3): 154-64.

DOI: 10.3109/00016350903575260

[14] Chethan Hegde, Krishna Prasad D, Deepmala S, Rakshith Hegde, Implant Restoration Materials: An Overview. International Journal of Oral Implantology and Clinical Research, January-April 2010; 1(1): 43-48.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10012-1007

[15] Larsson C, Vult von Steyern P, Sunzel B, et al. All-ceramic two to five-unit implant-supported reconstructions. A randomized, prospective clinical trial. Swed Dent J 2006; 30: 45-53.

[16] Zeynep O¨zkurt, Ender Kazazoglu: Clinical Success of Zirconia in Dental Applications Journal of Prosthodontics xx 2009; 1-5.

[17] Sun T, Zhou S, Lai R, Liu R, Ma S, Zhou Z, Longquan S. Load-bearing capacity and the recommended thickness of dental monolithic zirconia single crowns. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014 Jul; 35: 93-101.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.03.014

[18] Herrguth M, Wichmann M, Reich S. The aesthetics of all-ceramic veneered and monolithic CAD/CAM crowns. J Oral Rehabil (2005).

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01498.x

[19] Stawarczyk B, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Jahn D, Sener B, Roos M, Schmidlin PR Polyetheretherketone-a suitable material for fixed dental prostheses? J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2013 Oct; 101(7): 1209-16.

DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.32932

[20] Schwitalla A, Müller WD. PEEK dental implants: a review of the literature. J Oral Implantol. 2013 Dec; 39(6): 743-9.

[21] Ma R, Tang T. Current strategies to improve the bioactivity of PEEK. Int J Mol Sci. 2014 Mar 28; 15(4): 5426-45.

[22] Escalante Vasquez R. Management of occlusion over implants, part 2: three 10-year case follow-ups and evaluations. Dent Today. 2013 Jul; 32(7): 132, 134-5.

[23] Délben JA, Goiato MC, Gennari-Filho H, Gonçalves Assunção W, Dos Santos DM. Esthetics in implant-supported prostheses: a literature review. J Oral Implantol. 2012 Dec; 38(6): 718-22.

DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-d-11-00086

[24] Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 49: 843-48.

[25] Bozini T, Petridis H, Garefis K, Garefis P. A meta-analysis of prosthodontic complication rates of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in edentulous patients after an observation period of at least 5 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 26 (2011).

DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02546.x

[26] Jackson RD. The role of modern composites and ceramics in clinical practice. Dent Today. 30 (2011) 58-62.