Fatigue and Fracture Resistance Testing of Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Implant Abutments in an Ex Vivo Chewing Simulator Model

Polyether ether ketone (PEEK) has been introduced into implant dentistry as a viable alternative to current implant abutment materials. However, data on its physico-mechanical properties are still scarce. The present study sought to shed light on this topic utilizing an ex vivo chewing simulator model. A total of 48 titanium two-piece implants were allocated into three groups (n = 16 per group): (1) implants with PEEK abutments and an internal butt-joint connection (PBJ), (2) implants with PEEK abutments and an internal conical implant-abutment connection (PC), and (3) implants with zirconia abutments and an internal butt-joint connection (ZA). All abutments were restored with a non-precious metal alloy crown mimicking the upper right central incisor. A dynamic chewing simulation of half (n = 8) of the specimens per group was performed with 5 x 106 cycles and a load of 49 N at a frequency of 1.7 Hz with thermocycling between 5 and 55 degrees C. The other eight specimens served as unloaded controls. Surface roughness, implant-abutment connection microgaps (IACMs), and the titanium base-abutment interface microgaps (TAIMs) in the loaded groups were evaluated. Finally, a quasi-static loading test was performed in a universal testing machine with all samples to evaluate fracture resistance. Overall, 23 samples survived the artificial chewing process. One abutment screw fracture was observed in the PC group. The ZA group showed higher surface roughness values than PEEK abutments. Furthermore, ZA revealed lower TAIM values compared to PEEK abutments. Similarly, ZA was associated with lower IACM values compared to PBJ. Fracture loads/bending moments were 1018 N/704 N cm for PBJ, 966 N/676 N cm for PC, and 738 N/508 N cm for ZA, with no significant differences compared to the unloaded references. Artificial loading did not significantly affect fracture resistance of the examined materials. PEEK abutments were associated with better load-bearing properties than zirconia abutments, although they showed higher microgap values. PEEK abutments could, therefore, be feasible alternatives to zirconia abutments based on the present ex vivo findings resembling 20 years of clinical service.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the physico-mechanical properties of PEEK abutments as implant dentistry materials using a chewing simulator model. By comparing surface roughness, microgaps, and fracture loads between PEEK abutments and zirconia abutments, it was found that PEEK abutments performed better in load-bearing properties and could be a feasible alternative to zirconia abutments.