This study evaluated the effects of screw hole and preparation techniques on the fracture resistance of implant-supported translucent zirconia crowns after mechanical cycling. Forty crowns were divided into four groups of 10: CNH (cement-retained with no screw access hole) for the control, HBS (hole prepared before dense sintering), HAS (hole manually prepared after sintering), and HRS (hole manually prepared undergo resintered). All crowns survived 360,000 cycles with a peak force of 300 N at 10 Hz. Fracture resistance assessments indicated that the HBS technique exhibited the highest resistance, with CNS demonstrating the lowest. However, statistical analyses (Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests) revealed no significant differences between them. SEM fractographic analysis indicated that screw hole preparation techniques could influence fracture patterns and failure initiation in zirconia crowns.
HondaJKomineFKusabaK, et al.Fracture loads of screw-retained implant-supported zirconia prostheses after thermal and mechanical stress. J Prosthodont Res2020; 64: 313–318.
2.
ProussaefsPAlhelalA. The combination prosthesis:a digitally designed retrievable cement- and screwretained implant-supported prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent2018; 119: 535–539.
3.
SarafidouKVasileiadiGLouvrouMK, et al.Screwmentable implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent2023; 130: 35–47.
4.
ManiconePFRossiIPRaffaelliL. An overview of zirconia ceramics: basic properties and clinical applications. J Dent2007; 35: 819–826.
5.
BanS. Classification and properties of dental zirconia as implant fixtures and superstructures. Materials (Basel)2021; 14: 4879.
6.
KongkiatkamonSRokayaDKengtanyakichS, et al.Current classification of zirconia in dentistry: an updated review. PeerJ2023; 11: e15669.
7.
HosseiniMWorsaaeNGotfredsenK. A 5-year randomized controlled trial comparing zirconia-based versus metal-based implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the premolar region. Clin Oral Implants Res2022; 33: 792–803.
8.
WorniAKolgeciLRentsch-KollarA, et al.Zirconia-Based screw-retained prostheses supported by implants: a retrospective study on technical complications and failures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res2015; 17: 1073–1081.
9.
PjeturssonBEValenteNA, et al.A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res2018; 29: 199–214.
WittnebenJGBuserDSalviGE, et al.Complication and failure rates with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and single crowns: a 10-year retrospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res2013; 16: 356–364.
12.
ZhangYMaiZSBaraniA, et al.Fracture-resistant monolithic dental crowns. Dent Mater2016; 32: 442–449.
13.
HondaJKomineFKamioS, et al.Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw-retained zirconia-based molar restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res2017; 28: 1119–1126.
14.
PereiraGKRGuilardiLFDapieveKS, et al.Mechanical reliability, fatigue strength and survival analysis of new polycrystalline translucent zirconia ceramics for monolithic restorations. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2018; 85: 57–65.
15.
ManganoFMargianiBAdmakinO. A novel full-digital protocol (SCAN-PLAN-MAKE-DONE®) for the design and fabrication of implant-supported monolithic translucent zirconia crowns cemented on customized hybrid abutments: a retrospective clinical study on 25 patients. Int J Environ Res Public Health2019; 16: 317–336.
16.
PelekanosSNtovasPRizouV,et al.Translucent monolithic zirconia titanium-supported FP1 full-arch prosthesis: a novel proof of concept to address esthetic, functional, and biologic challenges. J Esthet Restor Dent2024; 36: 197–206.
17.
ReyesARDennisonJBPowersJM, et al.Translucency and flexural strength of translucent zirconia ceramics. J Prosthet Dent2023; 129: 644–649.
18.
RençberAKaramanT. Mechanical properties of zirconia materials with different translucency: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont2024; 37: 72–79.
19.
ZhangSSChengQWeiM, et al.Effect of screw access hole on the fracture load of implant-supported monolithic zirconia single crown. Adv Appl Ceram2022; 121: 1–11.
20.
HoCMBDingHChenX, et al.The effects of dry and wet grinding on the strength of dental zirconia. Ceram Int2018; 44: 10451–10462.
21.
JingZKeZYihongL, et al.Effect of multistep processing technique on the formation of micro-defects and residual stresses in zirconia dental restorations. J Prosthodont2014; 23: 206–212.
22.
KarlMFischerHGraefF, et al.Structural changes in ceramic veneered three-unit implant-supported restorations as a consequence of static and dynamic loading. Dent Mater2008; 24: 464–470.
23.
LanTHLiuPHChouMM, et al.Fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia crowns with different occlusal thicknesses in implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent2016; 115: 76–83.
24.
HussienANRayyanMMSayedNM, et al.Effect of screw-access channels on the fracture resistance of 3 types of ceramic implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent2016; 116: 214–220.
25.
BauerRZacherJStrasserT, et al.In vitro performance and fracture resistance of interim conventional or CAD-CAM implant-supported screw- or cement-retained anterior fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent2021; 126: 575–580.
26.
ZacherJBauerRHanieKS, et al.In vitro performance and fracture resistance of pressed or CAD/CAM milled ceramic implant-supported screw-retained or cemented anterior FDPs. J Prosthodont Res2021; 65: 208–212.
27.
ZacherJBauerRStrasserT, et al.Laboratory performance and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM implant-supported tooth-coloured anterior FDPs. J Dent2020; 96: 103326.
28.
DuLLiZChangX, et al.Effects of the screw-access hole diameter on the biomechanical behaviors of 4 types of cement-retained implant prosthodontic systems and their surrounding cortical bones: a 3D finite element analysis. Implant Dent2018; 27: 555–563.
29.
GrechJAntunesE. Zirconia in dental prosthetics: a literature review. J Mater res Technol2019; 8: 4956–4964.
30.
DenryILPeacockJJHollowayJA. Effect of heat treatment after accelerated aging on phase transformation in 3Y-TZP. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater2010; 93: 236–243.
31.
SubaşıMGDemirNKaraÖ, et al.Mechanical properties of zirconia after different surface treatments and repeated firings. J Adv Prosthodont2014; 6: 462–467.
32.
LawnBRPajaresAZhangY, et al.Materials design in the performance of all-ceramic crowns. Biomaterials2004; 25: 2885–2892.
33.
SkjoldASchriwerCGjerdetNR, et al.Fractographic analysis of 35 clinically fractured bi-layered and monolithic zirconia crowns. J Dent2022; 125: 104271.
34.
KongkiatkamonSPeampringC. Comparison of regular and speed sintering on low-temperature degradation and fatigue resistance of translucent zirconia crowns for implants: an in vitro study. J Funct Biomater2022; 13: 81.
35.
PoJMKieserJAGalloLM, et al.Time-frequency analysis of chewing activity in the natural environment. J Dent Res2011; 90: 1206–1210.
36.
FragaSPereiraGKRFreitasM, et al.Loading frequencies up to 20 hz as an alternative to accelerate fatigue strength tests in a Y-TZP ceramic. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2016; 61: 79–86.
37.
Al-OmariWMShadidRAbu-Naba'aL, et al.Porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained, cement-retained, and screw-cement-retained implant-supported metal ceramic posterior crowns. J Prosthodont2010; 19: 263–273.
38.
WaltimoAKononenM. A novel bite force recorder and maximal isometric bite force values for healthy young adults. Scand J Dent Res1993; 101: 171–175.
39.
BatesJFStaffordGDHarrisonA. Masticatory function—a review of the literature. III. Masticatory performance and efficiency. J Oral Rehabil1976; 3: 57–67.
40.
ObermeierMRistowOErdeltK, et al.Mechanical performance of cement– and screw–retained all–ceramic single crowns on dental implants. Clin Oral Invest2018; 22: 981–991.
41.
HeintzeSDCavalleriAZellwegerG, et al.Fracture frequency of all-ceramic crowns during dynamic loading in a chewing simulator using different loading and luting protocols. Dent Mater2008; 24: 1352–1361.
42.
ShirakuraALeeHGeminianiA, et al.The influence of veneering porcelain thickness of all-ceramic and metal ceramic crowns on failure resistance after cyclic loading. J Prosthet Dent2009; 101: 119–127.
43.
KoenigVDouillardTChevalierJ, et al.Intraoral low-temperature degradation of monolithic zirconia dental prostheses: 5-year results of a prospective clinical study with ex vivo monitoring. Dent Mater2024; 40: 198–209.
