Evaluation of volumetric wear of abutments on the retention loss of ball attachment systems in implant‐retained overdentures: An in vitro study

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>There is a lack of studies evaluating the wear of the male components of the ball attachment systems of implant‐retained overdentures.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>The purpose of this study was to compare the volumetric wear patterns four commercially used ball abutments.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Materials and Methods</jats:title><jats:p>Forty‐eight identical polyethylene and acrylic blocks were fabricated and four groups consisting of 12 polyethylene blocks with two implants and 12 acrylic blocks, which were used as overdentures, were generated (two groups with plastic females, one group with gold and one group with titanium females). Every specimen underwent 5000 insertion and removal cycles (~4.5 years) and retention forces were measured. For the evaluation of volumetric wear, all the ball abutments were scanned before and after the 5000 cycles using a three‐dimensional scanner and the data were analyzed using the software supplied by the manufacturer.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Statistically significant retention force differences were observed between the groups at each cycle (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < .05). Among the four groups, retention force was lowest in the group with titanium females (5.59 ± 2.27) and highest in the group with gold females (43.0 ± 6.3) at the end of 5000 cycles. Statistically significant dimensional changes in the male components were observed between the groups (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < .05). Volumetric losses were 11%‐13% in Group I and II, 1% in Group III, and 25% in Group IV. Group III showed significantly lower volumetric wear whereas Group IV showed significantly higher volumetric wear than all the other groups (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < .001). No significance was detected between Group I and II (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> > .05).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>Within the limitations, it can be concluded that although clinical studies are needed to ensure the findings of the present study, due to severe retention loss and volumetric abutment wear, ball attachments with titanium female components should be used with caution.</jats:p></jats:sec>