Top

Clinical Oral Investigations

Published in:

01-05-2019 | Original Article

Retentive force of PEEK secondary crowns on zirconia primary crowns over time

Authors: Oliver Schubert, Josef Reitmaier, Josef Schweiger, Kurt Erdelt, Jan-Frederik Güth

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 5/2019

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the retentive forces of CAD/CAM-fabricated polyetheretherketone (PEEK) secondary crowns on zirconia primary crowns over an artificial aging period representing 10 years of clinical service and compare them to electroformed secondary crowns made from pure gold.

Material and methods

Implant-supported zirconia primary crowns (N = 20) were CAD/CAM milled and provided either with electroformed secondary crowns (group ZE; N = 10) or CAD/CAM-fabricated PEEK secondary crowns (group ZP; N = 10). All secondary crowns were attached to a casted tertiary structure to ensure adequate stability. A universal testing machine was used to determine the retentive force values at baseline and after 1, 3, 5, and 10 years of simulated aging in the presence of artificial saliva. Data were analyzed applying Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U test. Level of significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Retentive forces were not different for the groups ZE and ZP at baseline (median ZE 2.85 N; ZP 2.8 N; p ≤ 0.218). Because retentive force values changed significantly over simulation time for group ZE (Kruskal-Wallis; p ≤ 0.028), the values between the test groups ZE and ZP differed significantly (Mann-Whitney U) at 5 years (ZE 3.03 N; ZP 2.76 N; p ≤ 0.003) and 10 years (ZE 3.1 N; ZP 2.78 N; p ≤ 0.011).

Conclusions

PEEK secondary crowns exhibit stable retentive force values over 10 years of simulated aging showing no signs of deterioration while the retentive force values of electroformed secondary crowns increase over time.

Clinical relevance

PEEK might be a suitable alternative to proven metallic materials for the fabrication of secondary crowns.

van Noort R (2012) The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 28(1):3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.10.014 CrossRefPubMed

Starr W (1886) Removable bridge-work. - porcelain cap-crowns. The Dental cosmos; a monthly record of dental science 28 (1):17–19

Langer A (1981) Telescope retainers for removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 45(1):37–43CrossRefPubMed

Lian M, Zhao K, Feng Y, Yao Q (2018) Prognosis of combining remaining teeth and implants in double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33(2):281–297. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5796 CrossRefPubMed

Rammelsberg P, Bernhart G, Lorenzo Bermejo J, Schmitter M, Schwarz S (2014) Prognosis of implants and abutment teeth under combined tooth-implant-supported and solely implant-supported double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(7):813–818. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12197 CrossRefPubMed

Langer Y, Langer A (2000) Tooth-supported telescopic prostheses in compromised dentitions: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 84(2):129–132. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.108026 CrossRefPubMed

Böttger H (1953) Die prothetische Versorgung des Lü̧ckengebisses mit Teleskopprothesen. Zahnärztl Rundsch (62):18–23

Hofmann M (1966) Die Versorgung von Gebissen mit einzelstehenden Restzähnen mittels sog. Cover-Denture-Prothesen. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 21:478–482

Körber K (1968) Konuskronen – ein physikalisch definiertes Teleskopsystem. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 23:619–630PubMed

10.

Koller B, Att W, Strub JR (2011) Survival rates of teeth, implants, and double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: a systematic literature review. Int J Prosthodont 24(2):109–117PubMed

11.

Wostmann B, Balkenhol M, Kothe A, Ferger P (2008) Dental impact on daily living of telescopic crown-retained partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 21(5):419–421PubMed

12.

Stober T, Danner D, Bomicke W, Hassel AJ (2016) Improvement of oral health-related quality-of-life by use of different kinds of double-crown-retained removable partial dentures. Acta Odontol Scand 74(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2014.976262 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Langer A (1980) Telescope retainers and their clinical application. J Prosthet Dent 44(5):516–522 doi:0022-3913(80)90070-0CrossRefPubMed

14.

Arnold C, Hey J, Setz JM, Boeckler AF, Schweyen R (2017) Retention force of removable partial dentures with different double crowns. Clin Oral Investig 22:1641–1649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2224-x CrossRefPubMed

15.

Diedrichs G, Rosenhain P (1991) Galvano-Außenteleskope in der direkten Technik. Quintessenz 42:49–55PubMed

16.

Vence BS (1997) Electroforming technology for galvanoceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 77(4):444–449CrossRefPubMed

17.

Weigl P, Hahn L, Lauer HC (2000) Advanced biomaterials used for a new telescopic retainer for removable dentures. J Biomed Mater Res 53(4):320–336CrossRefPubMed

18.

Weigl P, Lauer HC (2000) Advanced biomaterials used for a new telescopic retainer for removable dentures. J Biomed Mater Res 53(4):337–347CrossRefPubMed

19.

Bayer S, Kraus D, Keilig L, Golz L, Stark H, Enkling N (2012) Wear of double crown systems: electroplated vs. casted female part. J Appl Oral Sci 20(3):384–391CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, Naumann M (2010) Parameters affecting retentive force of electroformed double-crown systems. Clin Oral Investig 14(2):129–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0271-7 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Faber F, Huber C (2001) Electroformed telescope crowns – a hydraulic system. J Dent Res 80(Spec Iss):551

22.

Schwindling FS, Lehmann F, Terebesi S, Corcodel N, Zenthofer A, Rammelsberg P, Stober T (2017) Electroplated telescopic retainers with zirconia primary crowns: 3-year results from a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 21(9):2653–2660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2067-5 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Schwindling FS, Stober T, Rustemeier R, Schmitter M, Rues S (2016) Retention behavior of double-crown attachments with zirconia primary and secondary crowns. Dent Mater 32(5):695–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.002 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Bayer S, Kraus D, Keilig L, Golz L, Stark H, Enkling N (2012) Changes in retention force with electroplated copings on conical crowns: a comparison of gold and zirconia primary crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 27(3):577–585PubMed

25.

Engels J, Schubert O, Guth JF, Hoffmann M, Jauernig C, Erdelt K, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F (2013) Wear behavior of different double-crown systems. Clin Oral Investig 17(2):503–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0746-9 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Miyazaki T, Nakamura T, Matsumura H, Ban S, Kobayashi T (2013) Current status of zirconia restoration. J Prosthodont Res 57(4):236–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2013.09.001 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y (2009) A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 28:44–56CrossRefPubMed

28.

Kurtz SM, Devine JN (2007) PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials 28(32):4845–4869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.07.013 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Skinner HB (1988) Composite technology for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res (235):224-236

30.

Najeeb S, Bds ZK, Bds SZ, Bds MS (2016) Bioactivity and osseointegration of PEEK are inferior to those of titanium: a systematic review. J Oral Omplantol 42(6):512–516. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-16-00072 CrossRef

31.

Hahnel S, Wieser A, Lang R, Rosentritt M (2015) Biofilm formation on the surface of modern implant abutment materials. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(11):1297–1301. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12454 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Wimmer T, Huffmann AM, Eichberger M, Schmidlin PR, Stawarczyk B (2016) Two-body wear rate of PEEK, CAD/CAM resin composite and PMMA: effect of specimen geometries, antagonist materials and test set-up configuration. Dent Mater 32(6):e127–e136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.005 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Najeeb S, Zafar MS, Khurshid Z, Siddiqui F (2016) Applications of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in oral implantology and prosthodontics. J Prosthodont Res 60(1):12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2015.10.001 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Stock V, Schmidlin PR, Merk S, Wagner C, Roos M, Eichberger M, Stawarczyk B (2016) PEEK primary crowns with cobalt-chromium, zirconia and galvanic secondary crowns with different tapers-a comparison of retention forces. Materials (Basel) 9(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9030187

35.

Wagner C, Stock V, Merk S, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Eichberger M, stawarczyk B (2018) Retention load of telescopic crowns with different taper angles between cobalt-chromium and polyetheretherketone made with three different manufacturing processes examined by pull-off test. J Prosthodont 27(2):162–168CrossRefPubMed

36.

Merk S, Wagner C, Stock V, Eichberger M, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Stawarczyk B (2016) Suitability of secondary PEEK telescopic crowns on zirconia primary crowns: the influence of fabrication method and taper. Materials (Basel) 9(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9110908

37.

Stock V, Wagner C, Merk S, Roos M, Schmidlin PR, Eichberger M, Stawarczyk B (2016) Retention force of differently fabricated telescopic PEEK crowns with different tapers. Dent Mater J 35(4):594–600. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2015-249 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Ohkawa S, Okane H, Nagasawa T, Tsuru H (1990) Changes in retention of various telescope crown assemblies over long-term use. J Prosthet Dent 64(2):153–158CrossRefPubMed

39.

Gungor MA, Artunc C, Sonugelen M (2004) Parameters affecting retentive force of conus crowns. J Oral Rehabil 31(3):271–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01036.x CrossRefPubMed

40.

Hatton MN, Levine MJ, Margarone JE, Aguirre A (1987) Lubrication and viscosity features of human saliva and commercially available saliva substitutes. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 45(6):496–499CrossRefPubMed

41.

Dillschneider T, Nothdurft F, Abed-Rabbo M, Mitov G, Pospiech P (2009) In vitro-investigations on the wear behavior of different double crown systems. Dent Mater 25(5):e20CrossRef

42.

Becker H (1982) Untersuchung der Abzugskräfte abnehmbarer Teleskop-Prothesen. Zahnärztl Prax 33:153–156PubMed

43.

Hahnel S, Scherl C, Rosentritt M (2018) Interim rehabilitation of occlusal vertical dimension using a double-crown-retained removable dental prosthesis with polyetheretherketone framework. J Prosthet Dent 119(3):315–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.02.017 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Retentive force of PEEK secondary crowns on zirconia primary crowns over time
Authors: Oliver Schubert
Josef Reitmaier
Josef Schweiger
Kurt Erdelt
Jan-Frederik Güth
Publication date: 01-05-2019
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2657-x

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Retentive force of PEEK secondary crowns on zirconia primary crowns over time

Abstract

Objectives

Material and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Material and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

Prevalence of degenerative joint disease of the temporomandibular joint: a systematic review

Effect of different sizes of bioactive glass-coated mesoporous silica nanoparticles on dentinal tubule occlusion and mineralization

Prevention of oral carcinogenesis in rats by Dracaena cinnabari resin extracts

Influence of different thickeners in at-home tooth bleaching: a randomized clinical trial study

Bone repair in craniofacial defects treated with different doses of alendronate: a histological, histomorphometric, and immunohistochemical study

ConsEuro Conference 2019, Berlin, June 14-15