IN VITRO STUDY TO EVALUATE FATIGUE RESISTANCE OF VARIOUS IMPLANT OVERDENTURE STUD ATTACHMENTS WITH VARIOUS DENTURE BASE MATERIALS
Main Article Content
Keywords
.......
Abstract
The long-term success of implant-supported overdentures depends significantly on the mechanical durability of the attachment system and the compatibility of the denture base materials. Stud attachments like Locator, Ball, and ERA are commonly used, each interacting differently with acrylic resins and high-performance polymers.
Objective: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate and compare the fatigue resistance of various stud attachments—Locator, Ball, and ERA—when combined with different denture base materials: heat-cured polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), injection-molded PMMA, and polyetheretherketone (PEEK).
References
1. Thomason JM, Kelly SA, Bendkowski A, Ellis JS. Two implant retained overdentures—a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements. J Dent. 2012;40(1):22–34. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2011.12.003
2. Al-Ghafli SA, Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Kang K. Attachment systems for implant retained overdentures: a literature review. Implant Dent. 2009;18(2):95–102. doi:10.1097/ID.0b013e318198cf3b
3. Williams RJ, Ochiai KT, Hojo S, Nishimura R, Caputo AA. Retention of maxillary implant overdenture bars of different designs. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86(6):603–607. doi:10.1067/mpr.2001.119439
4. Cheng T, Liu Y, Wang R, Gao X, Wright RF, Ma Y. Maxillary implant overdentures with different bar designs: a 3-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(9):1055–1061. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02390.x
5. Krennmair G, Seemann R, Weinländer M, Piehslinger E. Influence of attachment type on the clinical outcome of mandibular overdentures supported by two implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10):1034–1039. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02085.x
6. Mengatto CM, Montagner A, Soares FZ, et al. Bond strength of different adhesive systems to PEEK: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125(5):839.e1–839.e9. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.06.018
7. Schwitalla AD, Müller WD. PEEK dental implants: a review of the literature. J Oral Implantol. 2013;39(6):743–749. doi:10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00102
8. Sadig WM. A comparative in vitro study on the retention and stability of implant-supported overdentures. Quintessence Int. 2009;40(4):313–319. PMID: 19417884
9. Naert I, Alsaadi G, Quirynen M. Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained overdentures: a 10-year randomized clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(4):401–410. PMID: 15382779
10. Varghese PK, Ramesh S, Rajapur A, Issrani R, Shrikar H. Retentive capacity of different attachment systems for mandibular overdenture: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019;20(9):1063–1067. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2642
11. Spazzin AO, Silva LHD, Guimaraes JG, Meira JB. Flexural strength of indirect composite resins and effect of thermomechanical aging. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(6):595–600. doi:10.1590/S1678-77572009000600012
12. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28(32):4845–4869. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013
13. Tannous F, Steiner M, Shahin R, Kern M. Retentive forces and fatigue resistance of thermoplastic resin clasps. Dent Mater. 2012;28(3):273–278. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.018
14. Bayer G, Stark H, Eckert SE, Heinemann F. Retention force of different attachment systems for implant overdentures: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;103(4):216–222. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60034-6
15. Elsyad MA, Khirallah AS, Faramawy AG. The influence of different implant overdenture attachments on stress distribution: a finite element study. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(2):95–101. doi:10.1111/jopr.12371
16. Vallittu PK. Flexural properties of acrylic resin polymers reinforced with unidirectional and woven glass fibers. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;81(3):318–326. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70279-6
17. Cakarer S, Can T, Yaltirik M, Keskin C. Complications associated with the ball, bar and locator attachments for implant-supported overdentures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011;16(7):e953–e959. doi:10.4317/medoral.17312
2. Al-Ghafli SA, Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Kang K. Attachment systems for implant retained overdentures: a literature review. Implant Dent. 2009;18(2):95–102. doi:10.1097/ID.0b013e318198cf3b
3. Williams RJ, Ochiai KT, Hojo S, Nishimura R, Caputo AA. Retention of maxillary implant overdenture bars of different designs. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86(6):603–607. doi:10.1067/mpr.2001.119439
4. Cheng T, Liu Y, Wang R, Gao X, Wright RF, Ma Y. Maxillary implant overdentures with different bar designs: a 3-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(9):1055–1061. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02390.x
5. Krennmair G, Seemann R, Weinländer M, Piehslinger E. Influence of attachment type on the clinical outcome of mandibular overdentures supported by two implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10):1034–1039. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02085.x
6. Mengatto CM, Montagner A, Soares FZ, et al. Bond strength of different adhesive systems to PEEK: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125(5):839.e1–839.e9. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.06.018
7. Schwitalla AD, Müller WD. PEEK dental implants: a review of the literature. J Oral Implantol. 2013;39(6):743–749. doi:10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00102
8. Sadig WM. A comparative in vitro study on the retention and stability of implant-supported overdentures. Quintessence Int. 2009;40(4):313–319. PMID: 19417884
9. Naert I, Alsaadi G, Quirynen M. Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained overdentures: a 10-year randomized clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(4):401–410. PMID: 15382779
10. Varghese PK, Ramesh S, Rajapur A, Issrani R, Shrikar H. Retentive capacity of different attachment systems for mandibular overdenture: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019;20(9):1063–1067. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2642
11. Spazzin AO, Silva LHD, Guimaraes JG, Meira JB. Flexural strength of indirect composite resins and effect of thermomechanical aging. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(6):595–600. doi:10.1590/S1678-77572009000600012
12. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28(32):4845–4869. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013
13. Tannous F, Steiner M, Shahin R, Kern M. Retentive forces and fatigue resistance of thermoplastic resin clasps. Dent Mater. 2012;28(3):273–278. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.018
14. Bayer G, Stark H, Eckert SE, Heinemann F. Retention force of different attachment systems for implant overdentures: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;103(4):216–222. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60034-6
15. Elsyad MA, Khirallah AS, Faramawy AG. The influence of different implant overdenture attachments on stress distribution: a finite element study. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(2):95–101. doi:10.1111/jopr.12371
16. Vallittu PK. Flexural properties of acrylic resin polymers reinforced with unidirectional and woven glass fibers. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;81(3):318–326. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70279-6
17. Cakarer S, Can T, Yaltirik M, Keskin C. Complications associated with the ball, bar and locator attachments for implant-supported overdentures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011;16(7):e953–e959. doi:10.4317/medoral.17312