Experimental study on implant-abutment locking force and abutment subsidence in a pure Morse taper connection implant system

Ren Bihui, Xu Yehao, Dai Jieting, Guo Shuigen, Wei Hongwu

PDF(3196 KB)
PDF(3196 KB)
West China Journal of Stomatology ›› 2024, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (3) : 372-381. DOI: 10.7518/hxkq.2024.2023387
Implantology

Experimental study on implant-abutment locking force and abutment subsidence in a pure Morse taper connection implant system

  • Ren Bihui(), Xu Yehao, Dai Jieting, Guo Shuigen, Wei Hongwu()
Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objective This test aimed to investigate the factors affecting the locking force between the implant and abutment and the amount of abutment subsidence in pure Morse taper connection implant systems. Methods With reference to the Bicon implant abutment connection design, different types of implant specimens and their corresponding types of abutments were fabricated. The implant-abutment locking taper was uniformly 1.5°. The locking depths were 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 mm. The diameters of the locking column were 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 mm. The thicknesses of the outer wall of the implant were 0.15 and 0.30 mm. The loading forces of the testing machine were 200, 300, and 400 N. At least 10 specimens of each group of implant-abutment were used. All specimens were loaded in the same manner using a universal testing machine (finger pressure + specified loading force, five times). The total height of the implant-abutment was measured before finger pressure, after finger pressure, and after the testing machine was loaded for five times to calculate the amount of sinking of the abutment. Finally, the implant and abutment were pulled apart using the universal testing machine, and the subluxation force was observed and recorded. Results The test loading force, locking depth, and locking post diameter had an effect on the implant-abutment locking force and abutment subsidence. The implant-abutment locking force increased with the increase in the test loading force, locking depth, and locking post diameter (R=0.963, 0.607, and 0.372, respectively), with the test loading force having the most significant effect. Abutment subsidence increased with the increase in test loading force (R=0.645) and decreased with the increase in locking depth and locking post diameter (R=-0.807 and -0.280, respectively), with locking depth having the most significant effect on abutment subsidence. No significant correlation was found between the thickness of the outer wall of the implant and the change in the magnitude of the implant-abutment locking force. However, an increase in the thickness of the outer wall of the implant decreased the amount of abutment subsidence, which was inversely correlated. Conclusion The locking force of the implant-abutment can be increased by adjusting the design of the pure Morse taper connection implant⁃abutment connection, increasing the locking depth and locking post diameter, and increasing the amount and number of times the abutment is loaded during seating. Problems, such as loosening or detachment of the abutment, can be reduced. The recommended abutment to be loaded should be no less than five times during seating to prevent the abutment from sinking and causing changes in the occlusal relationship in the later stages. Preliminary occlusal adjustments should only be conducted in the early stages of the use of temporary restorations, and final restorations and occlusal adjustments are recommended to be performed after using the abutment for a period of time.

Key words

dental implants / pure Morse taper connection / implant-abutment locking force / abutment subsidence

CLC number

R783.1

Cite this article

Download Citations
Ren Bihui, Xu Yehao, Dai Jieting, Guo Shuigen, Wei Hongwu. Experimental study on implant-abutment locking force and abutment subsidence in a pure Morse taper connection implant system. West China Journal of Stomatology. 2024, 42(3): 372-381 https://doi.org/10.7518/hxkq.2024.2023387

References

1 Romanos GE, Delgado-Ruiz R, Sculean A. Concepts for prevention of complications in implant therapy[J]. Perio-dontol 2000, 2019, 81(1): 7-17.
2 Lang NP, Pun L, Lau KY, et al. A systematic review on survival and success rates of implants placed immediately into fresh extraction sockets after at least 1 year[J]. Clin Oral Implant Res, 2012, 23(): 39-66.
3 Schmitt CM, Nogueira-Filho G, Tenenbaum HC, et al. Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: a systematic review[J]. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2014, 102(2): 552-574.
4 Machado LS, Bonfante EA, Anchieta RB, et al. Implant-abutment connection designs for anterior crowns: relia-bility and failure modes[J]. Implant Dent, 2013, 22(5): 540-545.
5 Ricomini Filho AP, Fernandes FS, Straioto FG, et al. Preload loss and bacterial penetration on different implant-abutment connection systems[J]. Braz Dent J, 2010, 21(2): 123-129.
6 do Nascimento C, Miani PK, Pedrazzi V, et al. Leakage of saliva through the implant-abutment interface: in vitro evaluation of three different implant connections under unloaded and loaded conditions[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2012, 27(3): 551-560.
7 Pessoa RS, Sousa RM, Pereira LM, et al. Bone remode-ling around implants with external hexagon and morse-taper connections: a randomized, controlled, split-mou-th, clinical trial[J]. Clin Implant Dent Rel Res, 2017, 19(1): 97-110.
8 汤初凉, 赵世凯, 黄翠. 莫氏锥度连接在口腔种植中的应用特点及研究进展[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2017, 52 (1): 59-62.
8 Tang CL, Zhao SK, Huang C. Features and advances of Morse taper connection in oral implant[J]. Chin J Stomatol, 2017, 52(1): 59-62.
9 龚金梅, 夏勋, 胡常琦, 等. 单纯锥度固位外连接种植体在前牙区窄牙槽嵴中应用的临床观察[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2022, 40(2): 175-182.
9 Gong JM, Xia X, Hu CQ, et al. Clinical observation of a narrow alveolar ridge in the anterior area with a simple taper retention implant[J]. West China J Stomatol, 2022, 40(2): 175-182.
10 Liu Y, Wang JW. Influences of microgap and micromotion of implant-abutment interface on marginal bone loss around implant neck[J]. Arch Oral Biol, 2017, 83: 153-160.
11 Chu CM, Huang HL, Hsu JT, et al. Influences of internal tapered abutment designs on bone stresses around a dental implant: three-dimensional finite element method wi-th statistical evaluation[J]. J Periodontol, 2012, 83(1): 111-118.
12 Baixe S, Fauxpoint G, Arntz Y, et al. Microgap between zirconia abutments and titanium implants[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2010, 25(3): 455-460.
13 Gao WM, Geng W, Luo CC. Prosthetic complications of fixed dental prostheses supported by locking-taper implants: a retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 5 years[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2021, 21(1): 476.
14 Ribeiro MCO, Vargas-Moreno VF, Gomes RS, et al. Implant-supported crowns with locking taper implant-abutment connection: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2022: S0022-3913(22)00379-1.
15 王美青. 口腔解剖生理学[M]. 7版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2012: 439.
15 Wang MQ. Oral anatomy and physiology[M]. 7th ed. Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House, 2012: 439.
16 周哲, 于婉琦, 杨诗卉, 等. 人天然牙的力学性能及其影响因素研究进展[J]. 实用口腔医学杂志, 2022, 38(2): 259-262.
16 Zhou Z, Yu WQ, Yang SH, et al. Progress in the study of mechanical properties of human natural teeth and their influencing factors[J]. J Pract Dent, 2022, 38(2): 259-262.
17 Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G, et al. Single tooth bite forces in healthy young adults[J]. J Oral Rehabil, 2004, 31(1): 18-22.
18 Shoji Y, Yusof MYPM, Idris RIB, et al. Bite force of patients with tooth pain[J]. Clin Exp Dent Res, 2022, 8(5): 1213-1217.
19 Moon SJ, Kim HJ, Son MK, et al. Sinking and fit of abutment of locking taper implant system[J]. J Adv Pro-sthodont, 2009, 1(2): 97-101.
20 Stenio Cardoso R, Sheyla Viana O, Sarita Pires V, et al. Morse taper internal connection implants: would abutment reseating influence retention[J]. Braz J Oral Sci, 2015, 14(3): 209-213.

Comments

PDF(3196 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/