Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose This study aimed to benchmark the load-bearing capacity and deformation behavior of an experimental Nb-1Zr dental implant against a form-identical experimental implant made of Ti-6Al-4V compared to a commercially established Ti-Zr implant system after artificial aging. Methods Twenty-four implant-abutment-crown assemblies (n = 8 per group) were subjected to chewing simulation (1×10⁶ cycles, 25 N) and thermocycling (4×10³ cycles, 5–55°C). Subsequently, all specimens were loaded axially until failure in a universal testing machine. Three-dimensional deviations were quantified by scan superimposition at the implant shoulder and two abutment levels. Results All specimens survived artificial aging. Mean maximum failure loads were 2595 N ± 1068 N for Nb-1Zr, 2358 N ± 1057 N for Ti-6Al-4V, and 3743 N ± 201 N for the commercial Ti-Zr implant system. The commercial system showed significantly higher F max than both experimental groups. In contrast, three-dimensional analysis revealed significantly higher abutment-level deformation in the commercial group (p ≤ 0.002), whereas shoulder-level deviations remained low across groups. Conclusions The experimental Nb-1Zr implant exceeded clinically relevant force thresholds and performed comparably to form-identical Ti-6Al-4V. Benchmarking against a commercial Ti-Zr implant system revealed higher ultimate load-bearing capacity of the commercial system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Petsa et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: