Send to

Choose Destination
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Aug;112(2):136-42. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.01.020. Epub 2014 Apr 13.

Implant-abutment interface: a comparison of the ultimate force to failure among narrow-diameter implant systems.

Author information

Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, College of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Assistant Professor, Division of Biomedical Sciences, Center for Craniofacial Molecular Biology, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif. Electronic address:
Professor, Division of Restorative and Prosthetic Dentistry, College of Dentistry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.



Limited available alveolar ridge bone and space deficiencies are some of the challenging scenarios that have led many dental implant manufacturers to develop narrow-diameter implants of various designs. Clinicians may have concerns about the durability and function of the narrow-diameter implants.


The purpose of this study was to explore and compare the ultimate failure resistance of the smallest diameter of the 2-stage type implant provided by 5 commonly used dental implant systems.


Thirty implants, Astra OsseoSpeed 3.0 mm and 3.5 mm, Straumann Bone Level 3.3 mm, Zimmer Tapered Screw-Vent 3.7 mm, Full Osseotite Certain 3.25 mm, and NobelSpeedy Replace 3.5 mm, 5 of each type, were tested in this study. A rigid clamp was used to hold the implants at a 30-degree angle to a static load vector. The load continued until the specimen broke or obviously deformed. Peak loads were recorded at that point for all the studied implant systems. Student t test and 1-way ANOVA were used to compare the mean peak load values (α=.05).


The mean fracture/deformation peak load values were 367.20 N ± 98.05 for Astra OsseoSpeed 3.0 mm; 568.80 N ± 85.24 for Astra OsseoSpeed 3.5 mm; 679.00 N ± 81.09 for Full Osseotite Certain 3.25 mm; 553.4 N ± 56.96 for NobelSpeedy Replace 3.5 mm; 802.80 N ± 134.50 for Zimmer Tapered Screw-Vent 3.7 mm; and 576.20 N ± 71.45 for Straumann Bone Level 3.3 mm. Generally, a higher load was required to cause failure in implants with larger diameters than in narrower-diameter implants, and more force was necessary to cause failure in Ti6Al4V alloy implants than in commercially pure titanium implants.


With regard to implant diameter and ultimate failure strength, Osseotite Certain 3.25 mm was considered to be more advantageous in comparison with the other implants tested.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center