Advertisement

Biomaterials Used with Implant Abutments and Restorations

  • Toru SatoEmail author
  • Kazuhiro Umehara
  • Mamoru Yotsuya
  • Michael L. Schmerman
Chapter

Abstract

In the aesthetic zone, the implant superstructure and abutment are key determinants for stability and durability. In this chapter, we describe the materials and the selection criteria for the abutment and the superstructure. Additionally, complications are reviewed which may be caused by the selected material post operatively.

Keywords

Materials Abutment selection Selection of the superstructure Complication 

References

  1. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Glantz PO, Lindhe J (1998) The mucosal attachment at different abutments. An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 25(9):721–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Annibali S, Bignozzi I, La Monaca G, Cristalli MP (2012) Usefulness of the aesthetic result as a success criterion for implant therapy: a review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14:3–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benic GI, Wolleb K, Sancho-Puchades M, Hammerle CH (2012) Systematic review of parameters and methods for the professional assessment of aesthetics in dental implant research. J Clin Periodontol 39(suppl 12):160–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belser UC, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Taylor TD (2000) Prosthetic management of the partially dentate patient with fixed implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res 11(suppl 1):126–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bürgers R, Gerlach T, Hahnel S, Schwarz F, Handel G, Gosau M (2010) In vivo and in vitro biofilm formation on two different titanium implant surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 21:156–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bundy KJ (1994) Corrosion and other electrochemical aspects of biomaterials. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 22(3/4):139–251PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Canullo L, Gotz W (2011) Cell growth on titanium disks treated by plasma of argon: experimental study. Clin Oral Implants Res 22(9):1082–1083Google Scholar
  8. Canullo L, Gotz W (2012) Peri-implant hard tissue response to glow – discharged abutment: prospective study. Preliminary radiological results. Ann Anat 194:174–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Canullo L, Micarelli C, Clementini M, Carinci F (2012a) Cleaning procedures on customized abutment: micro- scopical, microbiological and chemical analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(Suppl 7):55–56Google Scholar
  10. Canullo L, Micarelli C, Iannello G (2012b) Microscopical and chemical surface characterization of the gingival portion and connection of an internal hexagon abutment before and after different technical stages of preparation, Clinical Oral Implant Research, Early View, First publishing online; 16 May 2012Google Scholar
  11. Canullo L, Micarelli C, Lembo-Fazio L, Iannello G, Clementini M (2012c) Microscopical and microbiologic characterization of customized titanium abutments after different cleaning procedure, Clinical Oral Implant Research, Early View, First publishing online; 5 Dec 2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Canullo L, Micarelli C, Lembo-Fazio L, Iannello G, Clementini M (2014) Microscopical and microbiologic characterization of customized titanium abutments after different cleaning procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res 25:328–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cho HS, Jang HS, Kim DK, Park JC, Kim HJ, Choi SH et al. (2006) The effects of interproximal distances between roots on the existence of interdental papillae according to the distance from the contact point to the alveolar crest. J Periodontol 77:1651–1657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clementini M, Canullo L, Micarelli C (2013) Fibroblast growth on titanium disks treated by argon plasma: an in vitro triple-blinded study. Eur J Oral Implantol 6(Suppl. Spring):S29–S30Google Scholar
  15. ISO 6872 (2015) Dentistry-ceramic material International Standard ISO 6872 4th edn, 2015-06-1, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  16. Garber D, Salama M, Salama H (2001) Immediate total tooth replacement. Compendium 22:210–217PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Gehrke P, Ludwigshafen FC (2013) Join the (r)evolution, individual, CAD/CAM-supported implant setups part 1. Team work. J Cont Dent Educ 4:330–337Google Scholar
  18. Gehrke P, Tabellion A, Fischer C (2015) Microscopical and chemical surface characterization of CAD/CAM zircona abutments after different cleaning procedures. A qualitative analysis. J Adv Prosthodont 7:151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Giannopoulou C (2003) Effect of intracrevicular restoration margins on peri-implant health: clinical, biochemical, and microbiologic findings around esthetic implants up to 9 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 18:173–181Google Scholar
  20. Hanawa T, Ota M (1991) Calcium phosphate naturally formed on titanium in electrolyte solution. Biomaterials Oct 12(8):767–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harder S, Quabius ES, Ossenkop L, Mehl C, Kern M (2012) Surface contamination of dental implants assessed by gene expression analysis in a whole-blood in vitro assay: a preliminary study. J Clin Periodontol 39(10):987–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hara M, Takuma Y, Sato T, Koyama T, Yoshinari M (2014) Wear performance of bovine tooth enamel against translucent tetragonal zirconia polycrystals after different surface treatments. Dent Mater J 33(6):811–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hebel KS, Gajjar RC (1997) Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 77:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hidaka T, Minami M (2003) The basic coronal restoration treatment. Ishiyaku Publication Inc., Tokyo, pp 67–68Google Scholar
  25. Hidaka T (2012) Protocol in esthetic implant restoration. Ann Jpn Prosthodont Soc 4:35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jung RE, Sailer I, Hämmerle CH, Attin T, Schmidlin P (2007) In Vitro color changes of soft tissues caused by restorative materials. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 27(3):251–257Google Scholar
  27. Kay HB (1985) Criteria for restorative contours in the altered periodontal environment. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent 5(3):42–63Google Scholar
  28. Kim J, Raigrodski A, Flinn B, Rubenstein J, Chung K, Mancl L (2013) In vitro assessment of three types of zirconia implant abutments under static load. J Prosthet Dent 109:255–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kitagawa T, Tanimoto Y, Odaki M, Nemoto K, Aida M (2005) Influence of implant/abutment joint designs on abutment screw loosining in a dental implant system. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 75B:457–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kois JC (2001) Predictable single tooth peri-implant esthetics: five diagnostic keys. Compend Contin Educ Dent 22(3):199–206PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Koutouzis T, Wallet S, Calderon N, Lundgren T (2011) Bacterial colonization of the implant-abutment interface using an in vitro dynamic loading model. J Periodontol 82(4):613–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lazzara RJ, Porter SS (2006) Platform switching as a means to achieving implant dentistry for controlling post-restorative crestal bone levels. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent 26:9–17Google Scholar
  33. Levine RA, Huynh-Ba G, Cochran DL (2014) Soft tissue augmentation procedures for mucogingival defects in esthetic sites. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(suppl):155–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Linkevicius T, Vindasiute E, Puisys A, Peciuliene V (2011) The in uence of margin location on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res 22:1379–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Linkevicius T, Vindasiute E, Puisys A, Linkeviciene L, Maslova N, Puriene A (2013) The infuence of the cementation margin position on the amount of undetected cement. A prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 24:71–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Martin WC, Pollini A, Morton D (2014) The infuence of restorative procedures on esthetic outcomes in implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(suppl):142–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD (2003) Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 18:719–728PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Norton MR (1999) Assessment of cold-welding properties of the conical interface of two commercially available implant systems. J Prosthet Dent 81(2):159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Piattelli A, Vrespa G, Petrone G, Iezzi G, Annibali S, Scarano S (2003) Role of the microgap between implant and abutment : a retrospective histologic evaluation in monkeys. J Periodontol 74:346–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rompen E, Raepsaet N, Domken O, Touati B, van Dooren E (2007) Soft tissue stability at the facial aspect of gingi-vally converging abutments in the esthetic zone: a pilot clinical study. J Prosthet Dent 97(6Suppl):S119–S125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sailer I, Muhlemann S, Zwahlen M, Hammerle CH, Schneider D (2012) Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(suppl 6):163–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Salvi GE, Bragger U (2009) Mechanical and technical risks in implant therapy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(suppl):69–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Shadid R, Sadaqa N (2012) A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review. J Oral Implantol 38:298–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith RB (1997) Cemented vs screw-retained implant prostheses: the controversy continues. Alpha Omegan 90:58–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Sogo A (2010) Implant prosthesis for young dentists and technicians Introduction to technical experts – Step by step from examination and diagnosis to superstructure installation, Quintessence of Dental Technology Art & Practice (suppl), Tokyo pp 57–66Google Scholar
  46. Suese K, Sato T, Minami M, Kawazoe T (2009) Stress analysis of the design of zirconia copings and abut-ments on implant restorations: a 3-D finite element method. J Jpn Soc Oral Implantol 22:461–470Google Scholar
  47. Takano T, Tasaka A, Yoshinari M, Sakurai K (2012) Fatigue strength of Ce-TZP/AL2O3 nanocomposite with different surfaces. J Dent Res 91:800–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tarnow DP, Magner AW, Fletcher P (1992) The effect of the distance from the contact point to the crest of bone on the presence or absence of the interproximal dental papilla. J Periodontol 63:995–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vagkopoulou T, Koutayas SO, Koidis P, Strub JR (2009) Zirconia in dentistry: part1. Discovering the nature of an upcoming bioceramic. Eur J Esthet Dent 4(2):130–151PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Weber HP, Sukotjo C (2007) Does the type of implant prosthesis affect outcomes in the partially edentulous patient? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22(suppl):140–172PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Welander M, Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T (2008) The mucosal barrier at implant abutments of different materials. Clin Oral Implants Res 19(7):635–641Google Scholar
  52. Wilson TG Jr (2009) The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: A prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol 80:1388–1392CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Toru Sato
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kazuhiro Umehara
    • 2
  • Mamoru Yotsuya
    • 3
  • Michael L. Schmerman
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Crown and Bridge ProsthodonticsTokyo Dental CollegeTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Umehara Dental OfficeAomoriJapan
  3. 3.Department of Fixed ProsthodonticsTokyo Dental CollegeTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Department of PeriodonticsUniversity of Illinois College of DentistryChicagoUSA
  5. 5.Illinois Masonic HospitalChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations