Comparison of strength and failure mode of seven implant systems: an in vitro test.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The mechanical weakness of implant systems is a problem in the clinical situation. PURPOSE This study experimentally evaluated how joint design influences the strength and failure mode of dental implant systems. MATERIAL AND METHODS The strength tests focused on the systems as a whole. Seven implant systems with different joint design were evaluated. RESULTS Strength and failure mode varied significantly between the implant systems and deep joints, in contrast to shallow joints, favored resistance to bending moments. The mean failure force ranged between 138 to 693 Newtons for the various implant systems. CONCLUSION In construction of implant systems, joint depth should be taken into consideration.

[1]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .

[2]  D. Gratton,et al.  EFFECT OF PRELOAD TORQUE ON THE ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH OF IMPLANT PROSTHETIC RETAINING SCREWS , 1994, Implant dentistry.

[3]  C. Babbush,et al.  Five-year statistical and clinical observations with the IMZ two-stage osteointegrated implant system. , 1993, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[4]  J. Cummings,et al.  Prosthodontic treatment of patients receiving implants by predoctoral students: five-year follow-up with the IMZ system. , 1995, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[5]  A Schmitt,et al.  The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part III: Problems and complications encountered. , 1990, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[6]  G. O'Brien,et al.  Comparative study of antirotational single tooth abutments. , 1995, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[7]  G Watzek,et al.  Brånemark single tooth implants: a preliminary report of 76 implants. , 1995, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[8]  O C Tebrock,et al.  A measurement of torque values obtained with hand-held drivers in a simulated clinical setting. , 1993, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[9]  George A. Zarb,et al.  Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry , 1985 .

[10]  G Zarb,et al.  The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. , 1986, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[11]  E. Patterson,et al.  Distribution of load in an oral prosthesis system: an in vitro study. , 1995, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[12]  E A Patterson,et al.  Theoretical analysis of the fatigue life of fixture screws in osseointegrated dental implants. , 1992, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[13]  D van Steenberghe,et al.  A study of 589 consecutive implants supporting complete fixed prostheses. Part II: Prosthetic aspects. , 1992, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[14]  D. M. Robinson,et al.  Implant superstructures: a comparison of ultimate failure force. , 1992, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[15]  P. Branemark,et al.  Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. , 1990, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.