Reliability and Failure Modes of Implant‐Supported Y‐TZP and MCR Three‐Unit Bridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Chipping within veneering porcelain has resulted in high clinical failure rates for implant-supported zirconia (yttria-tetragonal zirconia polycrystals [Y-TZP]) bridges. This study evaluated the reliability and failure modes of mouth-motion step-stress fatigued implant-supported Y-TZP versus palladium-silver alloy (PdAg) three-unit bridges. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implant-abutment replicas were embedded in polymethylmethacrylate resin. Y-TZP and PdAg frameworks, of similar design (n = 21 each), were fabricated, veneered, cemented (n = 3 each), and Hertzian contact-tested to obtain ultimate failure load. In each framework group, 18 specimens were distributed across three step-stress profiles and mouth-motion cyclically loaded according to the profile on the lingual slope of the buccal cusp of the pontic. RESULTS: PdAg failures included competing flexural cracking at abutment and/or connector area and chipping, whereas Y-TZP presented predominantly cohesive failure within veneering porcelain. Including all failure modes, the reliability (two-sided at 90% confidence intervals) for a "mission" of 50,000 and 100,000 cycles at 300 N load was determined (Alta Pro, Reliasoft, Tucson, AZ, USA). No difference in reliability was observed between groups for a mission of 50,000. Reliability remained unchanged for a mission of 100,000 for PdAg, but significantly decreased for Y-TZP. CONCLUSIONS: Higher reliability was found for PdAg for a mission of 100,000 cycles at 300 N. Failure modes differed between materials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".