Study on wear resistance of implant abutment using different surface treatment methods

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2600789/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Study on wear resistance of implant abutment using different surface treatment methods

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2600789/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Abrasion often happened in abutment screw during the operation of dental implant, and it often resulted in reduction of tightness between the abutment and the implant, which always caused the connection failure at last. The purpose of this in vitro study was to research the wear resistance of implant abutment screw under different surface treatment methods, and to find appropriate method to increase the wear resistance of implant abutment screw. Titanium abutments which were treated by low-temperature surface nitriding and low-temperature magnetron sputtering with TiN coating respectively were the experimental groups, and the untreated titanium implants and related abutments were used as the control groups. Wear resistance was obviously increased after low-temperature surface nitriding and low-temperature magnetron sputtering.

Wear resistance

Implant abutment

Low-temperature nitriding

Low-temperature magnetron sputtering

Replacing missing or damaged teeth with dental implant restorations is an effective way in present oral treatment^{1, 2}. Using of titanium bases or titanium inserts as abutments for implant-supported restorations is a popular option for current dental treatment^3–5. Titanium usually illustrated higher corrosion resistance and passivation than other metals such as stainless steel^{6, 7}. Pure titanium can pass the nuclear magnetic resonance examination because of its very low magnetic conductivity. However, wear resistance and mechanical properties of pure titanium are usually not enough in actual application. Abutment was often made by pure titanium, and it always played the role of connecting dental implant to superstructure^8–10. A smooth and intact surface always help to improve the tightness of the abutment and implant^{11, 12}. Abrasion and distortion in the region of the screw joint during planting operation and chewing process may lead to looseness and failure of the connecting parts^13–15. Therefore, reducing abrasion was an effective way to increase the tightness and extend service life of the abutment and implant. However, the size of the abutment is very small, and the abutment requires not only surface wear resistance, but also high mechanical strength and toughness. Conventional heat treatment or coating preparation methods were generally carried out in high temperature environment, which always lead to the decrease of physical properties^16–19. A lot of study were focused on the changing in the esthetic, physical, fatigue fracture and biological properties of the abutment surface^20–22. However, Wear resistance and tightness were rarely mentioned^{23, 24}. Therefore, it is very necessary to find a new way to enhance the surface wear resistance of the abutment screw. In this paper, the methods of low-temperature magnetron sputtering TiN coating and low-temperature nitriding were used to enhance the surface wear resistance of the abutment screw. Related mechanism was also studied in this paper.

Titanium implants and related abutments (made by OSSTEM) were selected as the experiment specimens. Special testing device was designed to simulate the actual operation process and the moment of force was settled to 0.3N●cm which was commonly used in clinical operations. In each fastening experiment, the abutment was first screwed onto the implant, and then screwed off. Three experimental groups were designed according to the number of tightening times. The times were designed as 1, 10 and 20 respectively. There were a lot of fragments on the surface of abutment screw, which may be produced by the abrasion of the implant or the abutment screw. It is difficult to measure the wear resistance only by the quantity of the debris. Therefore, in order to observe the wear characteristic more clearly, the abutment screws were cleaned with alcohol before morphology observation. The surface was observed using Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Magnetron sputtering and nitriding treatment were carried out at a temperature of 120℃ and 490℃ respectively. Figure 1 shows the schematic diagram of the experiment.

Figure 2 shows the abutments after magnetron sputtering TiN, nitriding treatment and without any treatment respectively. The color of the abutments has changed significantly according to the figures. Abutments after magnetron sputtering TiN and nitriding treatment show golden yellow and dark black respectively. Figure 3 illustrates the SEM micrographs of the specimens tightened after 1 time. No obvious cracks, grooves and deformation could be found as the figures show. However, different wear morphology could be found in the magnified micrographs which was showed in Fig. 3G, Fig. 3H and Fig. 3I. In the beginning of wear process, the damage was mainly happened in the regions with a small depth from the surface. Therefore, various micrographs formed due to different surface wear resistance caused by different treatment methods. Obvious grooves could be found in Fig. 3I compared with Fig. 3G and Fig. 3H. TiN coating and nitriding region are exposed in Fig. 3G and Fig. 3H respectively. This shows that the wear resistance was significantly improved after magnetron sputtering TiN and nitriding treatment.

Figure 3. SEM micrographs of the abutment screws after 1 time tightening. A, Screw treated by magnetron sputtering. B, Screw treated by nitriding. C, Screw without any treatment. D and G, Magnification characteristic of Fig. 3A. E and H, Magnification characteristic of Fig. 3B. F and I, Magnification characteristic of Fig. 3C.

For the specimens without surface treatment, the cracks were more obvious than other two groups as the magnification micrographs illustrate, in other words, surface damage is still more serious than other two groups. However, cracks and grooves were difficult to be found after 20 times of tightening as it was showed in Fig. 5. This may be due to the change of abutment size and the reduction of frictional force between abutment and implant caused by abrasion after cyclic tightening process. According to the typical magnification micrographs of the damage area, scratch depth on the surface of the specimen without treatment is still deeper than other two specimens especially the specimen treated by nitriding treatment, which means abrasion of the specimens without surface treatment is still more obvious.

This study investigated the wear resistance of implant abutment screw under different surface treatment methods, and revealed the wear mechanism of the abutment screw. At the beginning of the tightening process, the wear resistance of the abutment screws was significantly improved owing the effect of TiN coating and nitriding treatment. After repeated tightening times, the friction between the abutment screws and the implant decreased, and cracks and large wear grooves were difficult to be found. Therefore, the wear resistance of the abutment screws could be improved by magnetron sputtering TiN coating and nitriding treatment. In the actual planting operation process, the service life of the abutment screw can be improved by the methods above. At the same time, it can be found from the results that the wear resistance of the abutment screws after surface nitriding treatment is better than that of the abutment screws coated with TiN by magnetron sputtering. However, the nitriding treatment needs to be carried out at a higher temperature (above 490 ℃), and the nitriding time is usually more than 10 hours. Therefore, this may affect the mechanical properties. Magnetron sputtering can be carried out at a lower temperature (below 120 ℃), and the coating surface was usually fine and smooth. Figure 6 shows the surface morphology of the coating surface after tightening 1 time, and different morphology could be found. For example, fine TiN grains can be seen in Fig. 6, and these grains were fell off the coating atter many times of screw cycles. Screw treated by nitriding also illustrated well morphology after screw cycles. According to the experiment results, screw treated by magnetron sputtering illustrated better wear resistance, therefore it seems that TiN coating by surface magnetron sputtering is a better choice to increase the wear resistance of the abutment screw.

Low-temperature surface nitriding and low-temperature magnetron sputtering with TiN coating were prepared on titanium implant abutments, and the wear resistance was increased obviously after the surface treatment by observing the surface wear morphology. According to the research, it could be found that low-temperature magnetron sputtering with TiN coating is more suitable for practical clinical application because the treatment temperature is lower and the surface gloss is more gorgeous.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Key Research and Development Plan of Zhenjiang (SH2021063), Natural Science Foundation (Basic Research Program) of Jiangsu Province (BK2020895), Jiangsu Agricultural Science And Technology Innovation Fund (CX(21)3152) and Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China (2020M681499).

R. Bertolini, S. Bruschi, A. Ghiotti, L. Pezzato, et al. Influence of the machining cooling strategies on the dental tribocorrosion behaviour of wrought and additive manufactured Ti6Al4V, Biotribology 11 (2017) 60–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotri.2017.03.002.
Mohammad Fazel, Morteza Shamanian, Hamid Reza Salimijazi. Enhanced corrosion and tribocorrosion behavior of Ti6Al4V alloy by auto-sealed micro-arc oxidation layers, Biotribology 23 (2020) 100131, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotri.2020.100131.
J. Olander, A. Ruud, A. Wennerberg, V.F. Stenport. Wear particle release at the interface of dental implant components: Effects of different material combinations. An in vitro study, Dent. Mater. 38 (2022) 508–516, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2022.01.001.
S.A. Gehrke, P.M.P. da Silva, J.L.C. Guirado, R.A. Delgado-Ruiz, B.A. Dedavid, M.A. Nagasawa, et al. Mechanical behavior of zirconia and titanium abutments before and after cyclic load application, J. Prosthet. Dent. 116 (2016) 529–535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.02.015.
T. Wang, L. Wang, Q. Lu, Z. Fan. Changes in the esthetic, physical, and biological properties of a titanium alloy abutment treated by anodic oxidation, J. Prosthet. Dent. 121 (2019) 156–165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.024.
R.M. Mizumoto, D. Malamis, F. Mascarenhas, D.N. Tatakis, D.J. Lee. Titanium implant wear from a zirconia custom abutment: a clinical report, J. Prosthet. Dent. 123 (2020) 201–205, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.11.008.
D.A. Queiroz, N. Hagee, D.J. Lee, F. Zheng. The behavior of a zirconia or metal abutment on the implant-abutment interface during cyclic loading, J. Prosthet. Dent. 124 (2019) 211–216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.09.023.
J. Ortega-Martínez, L.M. Delgado, M. Ortiz-Hernandez, M. Punset, et al. In vitro assessment of peek and titanium implant abutments: screw loosening and microleakage evaluations under dynamic mechanical testing, J. Prosthet. Dent. (2020) 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.033.
Y.H. Jeong, C.H. Lee, C.H. Chung, M.K. Son, H.C. Choe. Effects of tin and wc coating on the fatigue characteristics of dental implant, Surf. Coat. Tech. 243 (2014) 71–81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2012.02.046.
T.T. Wu, H.Y. Fan, R.Y. Ma, H.U. Chen, et al. Effect of lubricant on the reliability of dental implant abutment screw joint: an in vitro laboratory and three-dimension finite element analysis, Mat. Sci. Eng C-Mater. 75 (2017) 297–304, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.11.041.
Z. Xu Z, S. Krajewski S, T. Weindl, T, R. Loeffler, R, et al. Application of totarol as natural antibacterial coating on dental implants for prevention of peri-implantitis, Mat. Sci. Eng C-Mater. 110 (2020) 110701, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2020.110701.
M. Stimmelmayr, D. Edelhoff, et al. Wear at the titanium-titanium and the titanium-zirconia implant-abutment interface: a comparative in vitro study, Dent. Mater. 28 (2012) 1215–1220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.08.008.
M.A. Rodrigues, A.R. Cortez, J. Cortez, P. Gobbo, et al. Antimicrobial profile of a dental implant abutment coating to prevent adhesion and migration of bacteria and screw loosening, Dent. Mater. 37 (2021) e493-e501, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2021.08.016.
D. Taha, P.F. Cesar, A. Sabet. Influence of different combinations of CAD-CAM crown and customized abutment materials on the force absorption capacity in implant supported restorations-In vitro study, Dent. Mater. 38 (2022) e10-e18, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2021.12.025.
M.M. Olmedo, F.I. Godino, P.F. Liétor, et al. Corrosion and fracture analysis in screws of dental implants prostheses. New coatings, Eng. Fail. Anal. 82 (2017) 657–665, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2017.04.040.
F. Sun, L. Wang, X.C. Li, W. Cheng, Z. Lin, et al. Effect of surface modification on the long-term stability of dental implant abutment screws by plasma nitriding treatment, Surf. Coat. Tech. 399 (2020) 126089, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2020.126089.
T.T. Wang, L. Wang, Q.Q. Lu, Z. Fan. Influence of anodized titanium abutments on the esthetics of the peri-implant soft tissue: a clinical study, J. Prosthet. Dent. 125 (2021) 445–452, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.12.023.
M. Rosentritt,. Rembs, M. Behr, S. Hahnel, V. Preis. In vitro performance of implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns: influence of patient-specific tooth-coloured abutments with titanium adhesive bases, J. Dent. 43 (2015) 839–845, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.04.011.
J.M. Cordeiro, L.P. Faverani, C.R. Grandini, E.C. Rangel, et al. Characterization of chemically treated Ti-Zr system alloys for dental implant application, Mat. Sci. Eng. C-Mater. 92 (2018) 849–861, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.07.046.
M.A.L. Hernandez-Rodriguez, G.R. Contreras-Hernandez, A. Juarez-Hernandez, et al. Failure analysis in a dental implant, Eng. Fail. Anal. 57 (2015) 236–242, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2015.07.035.
P.L. Almeida, C.L. Silva, J.L. Alves, F.S. Silva, et al. Comparative analysis of the wear of titanium/titanium and titanium/zirconia interfaces in implant/abutment assemblies after thermocycling and mechanical loading, Rev. Port. Estomatol. Med. Dent. Cir. Maxilofac. 57 (2016) 207–214, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpemd.2016.07.002.
A.D. Schwitalla, M. Abou-Emara, T. Zimmermann, T. Spintig, et al. The applicability of PEEK-based abutment screws, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. 63 (2016) 244–251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.06.024.
H.C. Choe, C.H. Lee, Y.H. Jeong, Y.M. Ko, M.K. Son, et al. Fatigue fracture of implant system using TiN and WC coated abutment screw, Procedia Engineering 10 (2011) 680–685, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.113.
C.K. Srivastav, R. Kapoor, D. Khan. Fatigue behaviour of dental implant using finite element method, Mater. Today: Proc. (2021) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.341.
J. Pitta, F. Burkhardt, M. Mekki, V. Fehmer, P. Mojon, et al. Effect of airborne-particle abrasion of a titanium base abutment on the stability of the bonded interface and retention forces of crowns after artificial aging, J. Prosthet. Dent. 126 (2021) 214–221.
N. Jayakumar, G. Senthilkumar, S. Vigneshwaran, et al. Comparison of stress distribution on dental implant with different abutment types, Mater. Today: Proc. 45 (2021) 7970–7979, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.964.
K. Wang, J. Geng, D. Jones, X. Wei. Comparison of the fracture resistance of dental implants with different abutment taper angles, Mat. Sci. Eng. C-Mater. 63 (2016) 164–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.02.015.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Study on wear resistance of implant abutment using different surface treatment methods

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Material And Methods

3. Results

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

Declarations

Acknowledgments

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1