CAMLOG and Science

CAMLOG&Science – Chapter 3 14 | 15 FATIGUE RESISTANCE AND SEAL: COMPARISON OF CAMLOG ® AND OTHER IMPLANT SYSTEMS Steinebrunner et al. (2005a, 2005b) tested the influence of long-term dynamic loading on the fracture strengths of five different implant systems, one with external connection (Brånemark) and four with internal connections (FRIALIT ® -2, Replace™Select, CAMLOG ® and Screw-Vent ® ). The test specimens were subjected to dynamic alternating loading for a maximum of 1.2 million cycles at a rate of 1 Hz in a dual axis chewing simulator beforemaximum loading was applied for fracture strength determination (Fig. 10). The results demon- strated that theCAMLOG ® and theReplace™Select implant systemswithdeep internal tube-in-tube connections with cam-slot fixations had the highest fracture strength score (Tab. 4 and Fig. 11). A Fig. 10 A and B: Schematic representation of the test set-up for (A) dynamic, alternating and (B) maximum loading (adapted from Steinebrunner 2006). For each implant system to be tested, 16 implant-abutment combinations were fitted with a crown. A subgroup consisting of eight samples was exposed to dynamic alternating load in a chewing simulator that took into account a 30° cusp slope, a 2-mm lateral movement, and the physiological vertical chewing force of 120 N B reported by Richter (1995). The surviving implants of this subgroup as well as eight control samples of the other subgroup were then subjected to the quasi-static fracture load test. Force input point was identical to chewing simulation at 3 mm eccentric from the crown midpoint on the central cusp, sloped at 30° to the occlusion plane and 11.5 mm distant from the implant shoulder (Figure 10A).