Comparing the Fracture Resistance and Modes of Failure in Different Types of CAD/CAM Zirconia Abutments with Internal Hexagonal Implants: An In Vitro Study

Abstract

Three groups of zirconia abutments (n = 5) consisting of different connection designs or manufacturers were investigated (All-Zr, ASC-Zr, and AM-Zr groups). All-electric dynamic test instruments were used to place static loading on a specimen with a crosshead speed set at 1 mm/min. A Kruskal–Wallis test and a post hoc Mann–Whitney U test were used for statistical evaluation. The mean fracture resistance was 252.37 ± 82.79 N for the All-Zr group, 384.62 ± 45.24 N for ASC-Zr group, and 361.83 ± 90.31 N for the AM-Zr group. The difference of fracture resistance between the three groups was marginally significant (Kruskal–Wallis test, p = 0.054), with the ASC zirconia abutment tending to have higher fracture resistance than the full zirconia abutment. The modes of failure among the three types of abutments are different. The All-Zr group showed an oblique fracture line starting from the buccal aspect at the region of the implant platform. While the ASC-Zr and AM-Zr groups showed a relatively horizontal fracture line with a greater distance from the implant platform. The titanium inserts cannot significantly improve the fracture resistance of the zirconia abutment. However, they may alter the modes of failure, allowing buccal fracture surfaces of the zirconia abutments to be placed away from the implant platform, thereby protecting the implant–abutment connection.