Comparison of Surface Strains of Polymeric Frameworks for Fixed Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Digital Image Correlation Study

TL;DR

This study compares how different polymeric materials perform under load for implant-supported prostheses using digital image correlation.

Contribution

The study provides empirical evidence on the load-bearing capacity of high-performance polymers for dental prostheses.

Findings

FRC showed the lowest displacement and highest rigidity under load.

PEEK had the highest displacement, indicating greater flexibility.

Bayesian ANOVA confirmed significant differences in material performance.

Abstract

The gold standard materials used for frameworks of full-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses (ISFPs) have traditionally been metal alloys, but recently, high-performance polymers such as polyetherketones and fibre-reinforced resins have been gaining popularity despite the lack of evidence of load-bearing capacity. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the displacements and strains of milled polymeric frameworks for full-arch ISFPs using 3D digital image correlation. Methods: Twelve frameworks were milled from four polymeric materials (three per group): polyetheretherketone (PEEK), polyetherketoneketone (PEKK), poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and fibre-reinforced composite (FRC). Each framework was fitted with titanium links and screwed to implant analogues embedded in resin and tested for static load-bearing capacity up to 200N. Displacements were captured with two high-speed photographic cameras and analysed with a video correlation system on three spatial axes, U, V, and W, along with principal tensile, compressive and von Mises strains. Results: PEEK exhibited the highest displacement, indicating greater flexibility, while FRC showed the lowest displacement, suggesting enhanced rigidity. Von Mises strain analysis revealed that PMMA and PEEK experienced higher strain, whereas PEKK and FRC demonstrated lower strain distribution. Bayesian ANOVA provided strong evidence for material differences. Conclusion: FRC exhibited superior load-bearing characteristics, reinforcing its potential as a viable clinical alternative to metal-based ISFPs.

Figures