J Adv Prosthodont.  2018 Apr;10(2):155-162. 10.4047/jap.2018.10.2.155.

Comparison of implant component fractures in external and internal type: A 12-year retrospective study

• Yi Y
• Koak JY
• Kim SK
• Lee SJ
• Heo SJ

• KMID: 2409636
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.2.155

Abstract

PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to compare the fracture of implant component behavior of external and internal type of implants to suggest directions for successful implant treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Data were collected from the clinical records of all patients who received WARANTEC implants at Seoul National University Dental Hospital from February 2002 to January 2014 for 12 years. Total number of implants was 1,289 and an average of 3.2 implants was installed per patient. Information about abutment connection type, implant locations, platform sizes was collected with presence of implant component fractures and their managements. SPSS statistics software (version 24.0, IBM) was used for the statistical analysis.
RESULTS
Overall fracture was significantly more frequent in internal type. The most frequently fractured component was abutment in internal type implants, and screw fracture occurred most frequently in external type. Analyzing by fractured components, screw fracture was the most frequent in the maxillary anterior region and the most abutment fracture occurred in the maxillary posterior region and screw fractures occurred more frequently in NP (narrow platform) and abutment fractures occurred more frequently in RP (regular platform).
CONCLUSION
In external type, screw fracture occurred most frequently, especially in the maxillary anterior region, and in internal type, abutment fracture occurred frequently in the posterior region. placement of an external type implant rather than an internal type is recommended for the posterior region where abutment fractures frequently occur.

Keyword

Implant fracture; Screw fracture; Abutment fracture; Fixture fracture

MeSH Terms

Humans
Retrospective Studies*
Seoul

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Implant distribution according to the location and the platform sizes.

• 

  Fig. 2 Implant component fracture. Overall fracture was significantly more frequent in internal type. The most frequently fractured component was abutment in internal type implants, and screw fracture occurred most frequently in external type.

• 

  Fig. 3 Implant component fracture. (A) Screw fracture was the most frequent in the maxillary anterior region and the most abutment fracture occurred in the maxillary posterior region significantly. (B) In external type, the number of fractures of NP was larger than that in other platform sizes, and more fractures occurred in the RP than other platform sizes in internal type. Screw fractures occurred more frequently in NP and abutment fractures occurred more frequently in RP. Mx = Maxillary, Ant = Anterior, Mn = Mandibular, Pos = Posterior, NP = Narrow platform, RP = Regular platform, WP = Wide platform.

• 

  Fig. 4 Implant component fractures (By implant component). (A) Screw fracture occurred in internal type 1.6% and external type 2.0%, but there was no significant difference according to connection type. There was a significant difference according to implant position and platform size. The most frequent location was in the maxillary anterior region (5.9%), and most of them occurred in NP. (B) Abutment fracture occurred more frequently in internal type (8.2%) than in external type (0.1%). There was no significant difference in fracture rate according to the implant location, but all fractures occurred in posterior region. (C) Fixture fracture occurred 1.0% in internal type, and 0.3% in external type, there was no significant difference according to implant connection type or implant location, however, all fixture fractures occurred at the posterior region in RP. Mx = Maxillary, Mn = Mandibular, Ant = Anterior, Pos = Posterior, NP = Narrow Platform, RP = Regular Platform, WP = Wide Platform.

Reference

1. Laney WR, Jemt T, Harris D, Henry PJ, Krogh PH, Polizzi G, Zarb GA, Herrmann I. Osseointegrated implants for singletooth replacement: progress report from a multicenter prospective study after 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994; 9:49–54. PMID: 8150512.

2. Wu PB, Yung WC. Factors contributing to implant failure. Hong Kong Dent J. 2005; 2:8–12.

3. Carlson B, Carlsson GE. Prosthodontic complications in osseointegrated dental implant treatment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994; 9:90–94. PMID: 8150518.

4. Brägger U, Aeschlimann S, Bürgin W, Hämmerle CH, Lang NP. Biological and technical complications and failures with fixed partial dentures (FPD) on implants and teeth after four to five years of function. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001; 12:26–34. PMID: 11168268.

5. Luterbacher S, Fourmousis I, Lang NP, Brägger U. Fractured prosthetic abutments in osseointegrated implants: a technical complication to cope with. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000; 11:163–170. PMID: 11168207.

6. Binon PP. Implants and components: entering the new millennium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000; 15:76–94. PMID: 10697942.

7. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg. 1981; 10:387–416. PMID: 6809663.

8. Naert I, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, Darius P. A study of 589 consecutive implants supporting complete fixed prostheses. Part II: Prosthetic aspects. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 68:949–956. PMID: 1494126.

9. Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, Van Roekel N. Bending overload and implant fracture: a retrospective clinical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995; 10:326–334. PMID: 7615329.

10. Tolman DE, Laney WR. Tissue-integrated prosthesis complications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1992; 7:477–484. PMID: 1299643.

11. Sailer I, Mühlemann S, Zwahlen M, Hämmerle CH, Schneider D. Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23:163–201. PMID: 23062142.

12. Theoharidou A, Petridis HP, Tzannas K, Garefis P. Abutment screw loosening in single-implant restorations: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008; 23:681–690. PMID: 18807565.

13. Al Jabbari YS, Fournelle R, Ziebert G, Toth J, Iacopino AM. Mechanical behavior and failure analysis of prosthetic retaining screws after long-term use in vivo. Part 1: Characterization of adhesive wear and structure of retaining screws. J Prosthodont. 2008; 17:168–180. PMID: 18005336.

14. Al Jabbari Y, Fournelle R, Ziebert G, Toth J, Iacopino A. Mechanical behavior and failure analysis of prosthetic retaining screws after long-term use in vivo. Part 2: Metallurgical and microhardness analysis. J Prosthodont. 2008; 17:181–191. PMID: 18047489.

15. Al Jabbari YS, Fournelle R, Ziebert G, Toth J, Iacopino AM. Mechanical behavior and failure analysis of prosthetic retaining screws after long-term use in vivo. Part 3: Preload and tensile fracture load testing. J Prosthodont. 2008; 17:192–200. PMID: 18205737.

16. Al Jabbari YS, Fournelle R, Ziebert G, Toth J, Iacopino AM. Mechanical behavior and failure analysis of prosthetic retaining screws after long-term use in vivo. Part 4: Failure analysis of 10 fractured retaining screws retrieved from three patients. J Prosthodont. 2008; 17:201–210. PMID: 18205736.

17. Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, Van Roekel N. Bending overload and implant fracture: a retrospective clinical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995; 10:326–334. PMID: 7615329.

18. Morgan MJ, James DF, Pilliar RM. Fractures of the fixture component of an osseointegrated implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993; 8:409–414. PMID: 8270309.