Moscow, Moscow, Russian Federation
employee
Russian Federation
employee
employee
Moscow, Moscow, Russian Federation
UDK 61631 Стоматология
GRNTI 76.29 Клиническая медицина
Subject. The design of the implant-suprastructure connection is one of the key factors influencing the success of implant-supported prosthetic treatment. Different types of connection have their own biological and mechanical characteristics, on the knowledge of which the success of the patient's rehabilitation directly depends. Implants are permanently exposed to a cyclic chewing load, which spreads through the prosthetic structure to the internal connection, including the implant itself, the suprastructure and the fixing screw. The retaining screw is the weakest link in the internal connection of the implantation system. A clear understanding of the biomechanics of the implantation system allows you to optimize individual treatment planning and reduce the risk of complications. Objectives. Analysis and search for patterns of occurrence of biomechanical complications in various types of connections between the implant, screw and abutment. Determination of the advantages and disadvantages of using implant systems with different types of connection in orthopedic treatment based on implants, in order to improve the quality of planning and orthopedic treatment. Methods. Literature review was carried out to assess the state of the fixing screw of an implant in various types of implant connections. To write the article, more than 90 local and foreign sources were analyzed on electronic resources PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, Elibrary, Cyberleninka for keywords. Results. The literature review describes the current understanding of the causes of biomechanical complications arising in the connection of a dental implant, abutment and fixing screw. Conclusions. The results of our analysis allow us to conclude that the patterns of the occurrence of biomechanical complications in various types of connections between the implant, screw and abutment are being actively studied, however, the effect of the type of connection on the fixing screw requires additional study.
implant abutment connection, implant abutment junction, fixation screw, abutment screw, implant screw
1. Alonso-Pérez R., Bartolomé J.F., Ferreiroa A. et al. Original vs. nonoriginal abutments for screw-retained single implant crowns: an in vitro evaluation of internal fit, mechanical behaviour and screw loosening // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2018;29:1230. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13390.
2. Amanda Robau Porruaa, Yoan Pérez Rodríguezb, Laura M. Soris Rodrígueza, Osmel Pérez Acostab, Jesús E. Gonzálezc The effect of diameter, length and elasticmodulus of a dental implant on stress and strain levels in peri-implant bone: a 3D finite element analysis // Bio-Medical - Materials and Engineering. - 2020. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3233/bme-191073
3. Balik A., Karatas M.O., Keskin H. Effects of different abutment connection designs on the stress distribution around five different implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis // J Oral Implantol. - 2012;38:491-496. doi:https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00127.
4. Chae S.W., Kim Y.S., Lee Y.M. et al. Complication incidence of two implant systems up to six years: a comparison between internal and external connection implants // J Periodontal Implant Sci. - 2015;45:23-29. doi:https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2015.45.1.23.
5. Coppedê A.R., Bersani E., de Mattos Mda G. et al. Fracture resistance of the implant-abutment connection in implants with internal hex and internal conical connections under oblique compressive loading: an in vitro study // Int J Prosthodont. - 2009;22:283-286. PMID:19548411
6. Coppedê A.R., de Mattos Mda G., Rodrigues R.C., Ribeiro R.F. Effect of repeated torque/mechanical loading cycles on two different abutment types in implants with internal tapered connections: an in vitro study // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2009;20:624-632. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01690.x.
7. Coppedê A.R., Faria A.C., de Mattos Mda G. et al. Mechanical comparison of experimental conical-head abutment screws with conventional flat-head abutment screws for external-hex and internal tri-channel implant connections: an in vitro evaluation of loosening torque // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - 2013;28:e321-e329. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3029.
8. Freitas-Junior A.C., Almeida E.O., Bonfante E.A. et al. Reliability and failure modes of internal conical dental implant connections // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2012;24:197-202. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02443.x.
9. Geng J., Yan W., Xu W. Application of the Finite Element Method in Implant Dentistry // Zheijang university press. - 2008:148. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/JPBS.JPBS_296_18
10. Goiato M.C., Shibayama R., Gennari Filho H. et al. Stress distribution in implant-supported prostheses using different connection systems and cantilever lengths: digital photoelasticity // J Med Eng Technol. - 2016;40:35-42. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/03091902.2015.1127440.
11. Gracis S., Michalakis K., Vigolo P. et al. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2012;23:202-216. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02556.x.
12. Hotinski E., Dudley J. Jan Abutment screw loosening in angulation-correcting implants: An in vitro study // Prosthet Dent. - 2019. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.005.
13. Huang Y., Wang J.J. Mechanism of and factors associated with the loosening of the implant abutment screw: A review // Esthet Restor Dent. - 2019;31(4):338-345. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12494. Epub 2019 May 31. PMID:31150572
14. Sousa R.M., Simamoto-Junior P.C., Fernandes-Neto A.J., Sloten J.V., Jaecques S.V., Pessoa R.S. Influence of Connection Types and Implant Number on the Biomechanical Behavior of Mandibular Full-Arch Rehabilitation // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - 2016;31(4):750-760. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4785.
15. Jo J.Y., Yang D.S., Huh J.B. et al. Influence of abutment materials on the implant-abutment joint stability in internal conical connection type implant systems // J Adv Prosthodont. - 2014;6:491-497. doi:https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.6.491
16. Kim S.K., Koak J.Y., Heo S.J. et al. Screw loosening with interchangeable abutments in internally connected implants after cyclic loading // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - 2012;27:42-47. PMID:22299077
17. Kitagawa T., Tanimoto Y., Odaki M. et al. Influence of implant/abutment joint designs on abutment screw loosening in a dental implant system // J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. - 2005;75:457-463. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.30328.
18. Krishna Chaitanya Kanneganti, Dileep Nag Vinnakota, Srinivas Rao Pottem, Mahesh Pulagam Comparative effect of implant-abutment connections, abutment angulations, and screw lengths on preloaded abutment screw using three-dimensional finite element analysis: An in vitro study // The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. - 2018:161. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_219_17.
19. Lang L.A., Wang R.F., May K.B. The influence of abutment screw tightening on screw joint configuration // J Prosthet Dent. - 2002. doi:https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.121488.
20. Meijer H.J.S., Kuiper J.H., Starmans F.J.M., Bosman F. Stress Distribution around Dental Implants: Influence of Superstructure, Length of Implants and Height of Mandible // J. Prosthet. Dent. - 1992;68(1):96-102. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90293-j.
21. Michalakis K.X., Calvani P.L., Muftu S. et al. The effect of different implant-abutment connections on screw joint stability // J Oral Implantol. - 2014;40:146-152. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-11-00032
22. Misch C.E. Dental implant prosthetics: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2014. ISBN: 9780323112918
23. Muley N., Prithviraj D., Gupta V. Evolution of external and internal implant to abutment connection // Int J Oral Implantol Clin Res. - 2012;3(3):122-129. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5005/JP-JOURNALS-10012-1079
24. Park J.M., Baek C.H., Heo S.J. et al. An in vitro evaluation of the loosening of different interchangeable abutments in internal-connectiontype implants // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5295.
25. Pessoa R.S., Muraru L., Junior E.M., Vaz L.G., Sloten J.V., Duyck J. et al. Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants - CT-based nonlinear, three-dimensional finite element analysis // Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. - 2010;12:219-234. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00155.x.
26. Qian J., Wennerberg A., Albrektsson T. Reasons for marginal bone loss around oral implants // Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. - 2012;14:792-807. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12014.
27. Rack A., Rack T., Stiller M., Riesemeier H., Zablcr S., Nelson K. In vitro synchrotron-based radiography of micro-gap formation at the implant-abutment interface of two-piece dental implants // J Synchrotron Radiat. - 2010;17:289-294. doi:https://doi.org/10.1107/S0909049510001834
28. Renouard F., Rangert B. Risk factors in implant dentistry. Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc. 2004:182. 978-2-912550-56-9, 9782912550569
29. Ricomini Filho A.P., Fernandes F.S., Straioto F.G., da Silva W.J., Del Bel Cury A.A. Preload loss and bacterial penetration on different implant-abutment connection systems // Braz Dent J. - 2010;21:123-129. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-64402010000200006.
30. Sadid-Zadeh R., Kutkut A., Kim H. Prosthetic Failure in Implant Dentistry // Dent. Clin. North Am. - 2015;59:195-214. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2014.08.008.
31. Sailer I., Mühlemann S., Zwahlen M. et al. Cemented and screw retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2012;23:163-201. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02538.x.
32. Sakamoto K., Homma S., Takanashi T. et al. Influence of eccentric cyclic loading on implant components: comparison between external joint system and internal joint system // Dent Mater J. - 2016;35:929-937. doi:https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2020-030
33. Siadat H., Beyabanaki E., Mousavi N., Alikhasi M. Comparison of fit accuracy and torque maintenance of zirconia and titanium abutments for internal tri-channel and external-hex implant connections // J Adv Prosthodont. - 2017;9:271-277. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.4.271
34. Wolfart S., Harder S., Reich S., Sailer I., Weber V. Implant prosthodontics a patient-oriented concept. 2016. ISBN: 978-1-85097-282-2; 9781850972822
35. Vetromilla B.M., Brondani L.P., Pereira-Cenci T., Bergoli C.D. Influence of different implant-abutment connection designs on the mechanical and biological behavior of single-tooth implants in the maxillary esthetic zone: a systematic review // J Prosthet Dent. - 2019;121:398-403. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.007.
36. Vigolo P., Gracis S., Carboncini F., Mutinelli S. AIOP (Italian Academy of Prosthetic Dentistry) clinical research group internal- vs external connection single implants: a retrospective study in an Italian population treated by certified prosthodontists // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - 2016;31:1385-1396. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4618.
37. Wang J.H., Judge R., Bailey D. A 5-year retrospective assay of implant treatments and complications in private practice: the restorative complications of single and short-span implant-supported fixed prostheses // Int J Prosthodont. - 2016;29:435-444. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4794.
38. Yamanishi Y., Yamaguchi S., Inuzato S., Naksno T., Yatam H. Influences ol implant neck design and implant-abutment joint type on peri-implant bone stress and abutment micromovement: three-demensional finite element analysis // Dent Mater. - 2012;28:1126-1133. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.07.160
39. Yao K.T., Kao H.C., Cheng C.K. et al. The potential risk of conical implant-abutment connections: the antirotational ability of Cowell implant system // Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. - 2015;17:1208-1216. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12219
40. York R. Characterization of Micro-Machining of Dental Screws and Abutments : Diss. Ottawa. Canada, 2017:9-19,79-80. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.20381/RUOR-20349
41. Zeno H.A., Buitrago R.L., Sternberger S.S. et al. The effect of tissue entrapment on screw loosening at the implant/abutment interface of external- and internal-connection implants: an in vitro study // J Prosthodont. - 2016;25:216-223. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12329
42. Voronin V.F., Solodkiy V.G., Solodkaya D.V., Muraev A.A. Profilaktika i ustranenie oslozhneniy, svyazannyh s vykruchivaniem i perelomami central'nyh vintov v implantatah. Rossiyskiy stomatologicheskiy zhurnal. 2013;3:22-26. [V.F. Voronin, V.G. Solodkiy, D.V. Solodkaya, A.A. Muraev. Prevention and elimination of complications associated with unscrewing and fractures of central screws in implants. Russian dental journal. 2013;3:22-26. (In Russ.)]. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=19422986
43. Nikitin S.G., Pervov Yu.Yu., Saleev R.A., Amhadova M.A. Vliyanie fiziko-himicheskih faktorov, voznikayuschih v elementah implantacionnyh sistem, na central'nye vinty golovok pri reabilitacii pacientov v klinike ortopedicheskoy stomatologii. Medicinskiy alfavit. Seriya «Stomatologiya». 2019;4;34(409):35-39. [S.G. Nikitin, Yu.Yu. Pervov, R.A. Saleev, M.A. Amkhadova. The influence of physicochemical factors arising in the elements of implantation systems on the central head screws during the rehabilitation of patients in the clinic of orthopedic dentistry. Medical alphabet. Series "Dentistry". 2019;4;34(409):35-39. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.33667/2078-5631-2019-4-34(409)-35-39
44. Polyakova V.V. Bocharov A.V. Primenenie dental'nyh implantatov sistemy «Anthogyr» dlya vosstanovleniya defektov zubnyh ryadov. Vestnik Smolenskoy medicinskoy akademii. 2010;9(2):105-107. [V.V. Polyakova, A.V. Bocharov. The use of dental implants of the "Anthogyr" system for the restoration of defects in the dentition. Bulletin of the Smolensk Medical Academy. 2010;9(2):105-107. (In Russ.)]. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17051348
45. Rozhnova O.M., Pavlov V.V., Sadovoy M.A. Biologicheskaya sovmestimost' medicinskih izdeliy na osnove metallov, prichiny formirovaniya patologicheskoy reaktivnosti (obzor inostrannoy literatury). Byulleten' sibirskoy mediciny. 2015;14;4:110-118. [O.M. Rozhnova, V.V. Pavlov, M.A. Sadovoy. Biological compatibility of medical devices based on metals, the reasons for the formation of pathological reactivity (review of foreign literature). Bulletin of Siberian Medicine. 2015;14;4:110-118. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-0363-2015-4-110-118
46. Freitas da Silva E.V., Dos Santos D.M., Sonego M.V. et al. Does the presence of a cantilever influence the survival and success of partial implant-supported dental prostheses? Systematic review and metaanalysis // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - 2018. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.6413
47. Zembic A., Kim S., Zwahlen M., Kelly J.R. Systematic review of the survival rate and incidence of biologic, technical, and esthetic complications of single implant abutments supporting fixed prostheses // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - 2014;29:99-116. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g2.2
48. Jung R.E., Zembic A., Pjetursson B.E., Zwahlen M., Thoma D.S. Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and esthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2012;23:2-21. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02547.x
49. Pjetursson B.E., Thoma D., Jung R. et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after a mean observation period of at least 5 years // Clin Oral Implants Res. - 2012;23:22-38. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02546.x
