Anaerobic adhesives effect on counter‐torque of abutment screws on implants with external hexagon and conical connections: An in vitro study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abutment screw loosening is a common complication of implant supported prostheses, especially for single crowns. In engineering, anaerobic adhesives (AA) are used to provide chemical locking between screw surfaces, but their application in implantology remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to evaluate, in vitro, the effect of AA on counter-torque of abutment screws for cemented prosthesis on dental implants with external hexagon connection (EHC) and conical connection (CC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sample was composed by 60 specimens, 30 dental implants with EHC and 30 with CC. Abutments (transmucosal 3 mm straight universal abutment) were installed without AA (control group) or with application of AA with two different adhesive strength: medium strength (LOCTITE® 242) and high strength (LOCTITE® 277). The specimens were subjected to mechanical cycling at 37°C, with a load setting of 133 N, a 1.3 Hz frequency, and 1 200 000 cycles. The abutments were removed, and the counter-torque values were registered. Screws and implants were inspected using a stereomicroscope to verify the presence of residual adhesive and damage the internal structures. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparison tests (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Comparing to the torque of installation, the medium strength AA kept the counter-torque values for CC implants and the high strength AA kept the counter-torque for EHC implants and increased for CC implants. In the intergroup comparisons, control group presented significantly lower counter-torque values than other groups, both for EHC and CC implants. High strength AA presented similar results to medium strength AA in the EHC implants, but in the CC implants presented higher counter-torque values. Damage in threads was more frequent in the groups that received high strength AA. CONCLUSION: The use of AA increased the counter-torque of abutment screws, both in implants with EHC and CC.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".