The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of removal torque between prefabricated and customized abutment screw

기성품과 맞춤형 임플란트 지대주 나사의 풀림 토크 비교

  • Jamiyandorj, Otgonbold (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Jee-Hwan (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Mu-Seong (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Park, Young-Bum (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Shim, June-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
  • ;
  • 김지환 (연세대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 김무성 (연세대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 박영범 (연세대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 심준성 (연세대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2012.06.19
  • Accepted : 2012.08.28
  • Published : 2012.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the removal torque between prefabricated and customized implant abutment screw. Materials and methods: Three types of implant system (Osstem, Astra, Zimmer) were used. For each system, prefabricated abutment screw (control group) and customized abutment screw (test group) were used to connect the fixture and the abutment (n = 6). Digital torque gauze was used to control the tightening torque and the screws were tightened under each manufacturer's recommendation. 10 minutes after the connection the same tightening torque was applied, and 5 minutes after the second connection, the removal torque was measured. This procedure was repeated 10 times. In the cyclic loading test, 10 minutes after the first connection to the 6 groups (n = 3), the same tightening torque was applied, and a total of 1,000,000 time loading was applied at 30 degree angle to long axis with 50 N load. Repeated measures of ANOVA test (${\alpha}$=.05) was used as statistics to evaluate the effect of repeated loading number on the removal torque. Independent t-test was used to evaluate the difference in removal torque after cyclic loading. Results: The removal torque significantly decreased as the number of loading repetition increased (P<.05). In the 10 time repetition test, there was no significant difference between the prefabricated and customized implant abutment screw of the 3 implant system (P<.05). Also in the cyclic loading test, there was no significant difference between the prefabricated and customized implant abutment screw of the 3 implant system (P<.05). Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, there was no significant difference in the removal torque between the prefabricated abutment screw and customized abutment screws.

연구 목적: 본 연구의 목적은 임플란트 지대주 연결에 사용되는 기성품 나사와 맞춤형 나사의 풀림 토크를 비교하는 것이다. 연구 재료 및 방법: 세가지 임플란트 시스템에(Osstem, Astra, Zimmer) 대해 고정체와 지대주의 연결에 기성품 나사군(대조군)과 맞춤형 나사군(실험군)으로 총 6군(n = 6)으로 나누었다. 조임 토크조절은 디지털 토크 측정기를 이용하였으며 각 임플란트 제조사가 추천한 조임 토크 값을 적용하였다. 체결 10분 후 동일한 조임 토크를 다시 적용하고 5분 후에 풀림 토크력을 측정하였다. 이 과정을 10회 반복 측정하였다. 반복 하중 실험에서는 6개 군(n = 3)에 대해 체결 10분 후 2차 조임 토크를 적용하고 $30^{\circ}$ 경사로 50 N 하중으로 총 1,000,000번 반복 하중을 가하였다. 반복 하중 적용 이후 풀림 토크값을 측정하였다. 통계 방법으로는 10회 반복 측정에서 풀림 토크값의 차이를 비교하기 위해 repeated measures of ANOVA test (${\alpha}$=.05)를 사용하였고, 반복 하중 후 풀림 토크값의 차이를 비교하기 위해서 각 시스템별 Independant t-test로 통계 처리하였다. 결과: 모든 군에서 반복 횟수가 증가할수록 풀림 토크값이 유의성 있게 감소하는 것으로 나타났다(P<.05). 10회 반복 측정 실험에서는 세 종류의 임플란트에서 대조군(기성품나사)과 실험군(맞춤형 나사) 간에 풀림 토크값은 유의차가 없었다(P>.05). 반복 하중 실험에서 세가지 시스템에서 대조군과 실험군 간의 풀림 토크력은 유의한 차이가 없었다(P>.05). 결론: 반복 측정된 풀림력 검사와 반복 하중을 적용 후 풀림력 검사에서 맞춤형 나사와 기성품 나사의 풀림력은 유의한 차이가 없었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Eckert ES. Text book of Oral & Maxillofacial Implantology. 2nd ed. Korea, Daehan Narae Publishing Inc, 2006, p. 304.
  2. McGlumphy EA, Mendel DA, Holloway JA. Implant screw mechanics. Dent Clin North Am 1998;42:71-89.
  3. Carlson B, Carlsson GE. Prosthodontic complications in osseointegrated dental implant treatment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:90-4.
  4. Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Branemark implants in edentulous jaws: a study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991;6:270-6.
  5. Jung RE, Pjetursson BE, Glauser R, Zembic A, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:119-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01453.x
  6. Laney WR, Jemt T, Harris D, Henry PJ, Krogh PH, Polizzi G, Zarb GA, Herrmann I. Osseointegrated implants for singletooth replacement: progress report from a multicenter prospective study after 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:49-54.
  7. Henry PJ, Laney WR, Jemt T, Harris D, Krogh PH, Polizzi G, Zarb GA, Herrmann I. Osseointegrated implants for singletooth replacement: a prospective 5-year multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:450-5.
  8. Priest G. Single-tooth implants and their role in preserving remaining teeth: a 10-year survival study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:181-8.
  9. Bickford JH. An introduction to the design and behavior of bolted joint Marcel Dekker. New York, Raven Press; 1995, p. 894.
  10. Im SM, Kim DG, Park CJ, Cha MS, Cho LR. Biomechanical considerations for the screw of implant prosthesis: A literature review. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2010;48:61-8. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2010.48.1.61
  11. Haack JE, Sakaguchi RL, Sun T, Coffey JP. Elongation and preload stress in dental implant abutment screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:529-36.
  12. Zembic A, Sailer I, Jung RE, Hammerle CH. Randomized-controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for single-tooth implants in canine and posterior regions: 3-year results. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:802-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01717.x
  13. Choi JH, Yang JH, Cho WP, Lee JB. The influence of abutment screw length and repeated tightening on screw loosening in dental implant. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2006;44:432-42.
  14. Hong YS, Park EJ, Kim SJ, Kim MR, Heo SJ, Park JM. Customized abutment and screw-type implant prostheses after cementation based on the digital intra-oral impression technique. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2012;50:67-73. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2012.50.1.67
  15. Lee TS, Han JS, Yang JH, Lee JB, Kim SH. An influence of abutment materials on a screw-loosening after cyclic loading. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2007;45:240-49.
  16. Siamos G, Winkler S, Boberick KG. Relationship between implant preload and screw loosening on implant-supported prostheses. J Oral Implantol 2002;28:67-73. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2002)028<0067:TRBIPA>2.3.CO;2
  17. Graf H. Bruxism. Dent Clin North Am 1969;13:659-65.
  18. Gibbs CH, Mahan PE, Mauderli A, Lundeen HC, Walsh EK. Limits of human bite strength. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:226-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90480-4
  19. Shigley JE, Mischke CR. Standard Handbook of Machine Designs. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1986, p. 369.

Cited by

  1. A comparative study on the fit and screw joint stability of ready-made abutment and CAD-CAM custom-made abutment vol.51, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2013.51.4.276
  2. Influencing factors of satisfaction and revisiting intention of dental implant patients vol.15, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.13065/jksdh.2015.15.06.983
  3. 임플란트 고정체와 지대주의 체결방식에 따른 스크류 풀림토크에 관한연구 vol.35, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2013.35.3.201