The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 22 , ISSUE 11 ( November, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Assessment of Retention of CAD-CAM Milled PEKK vs PEEK Double Crown-retained Removable Partial Dentures: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Omnia M Refai, Noha H Nawar, Ingy T Lebshtien

Keywords : Computer-Aided Design-Computer-Aided Manufacturing, Denture retention, Polyetheretherketone, Randomized clinical trial, Telescopic attachments

Citation Information : Refai OM, Nawar NH, Lebshtien IT. Assessment of Retention of CAD-CAM Milled PEKK vs PEEK Double Crown-retained Removable Partial Dentures: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (11):1250-1256.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3233

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 24-02-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Aim and objective: To assess and compare the dislodging force of double crown-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) made from polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) at insertion (baseline) and one year after clinical functional use. Materials and methods: A total of 18 patients with maxillary symmetrical Kennedy class I with the second premolars being the last standing abutment were selected. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups according to the materials used for the construction of the double crown-retained RPD. Group I: Double crown-retained RPDs were made from PEKK. Group II: Double crown-retained RPDs were made from PEEK. For both groups, the primary copings were made from zirconia (ZrO2). The dislodging force was measured using a digital force gauge at baseline and one year after clinical functional use. An independent t-test was used for intergroup comparisons and a paired t-test for intragroup comparisons. Results: when comparing both groups at baseline, there was no significant difference between the two groups, but after one year, Group I had a significantly higher dislodging force value than Group II. Individually, there was an increase in dislodging force in both groups one year after clinical functional use, which was statistically significant for Group I. Conclusion: After clinical functional use, double crown-retained RPDs made from PEEK in combination with ZrO2 primary copings demonstrate a minimal increase in dislodging force, while those made of PEKK demonstrate a significant increase in dislodging force. Clinical significance: All patients were satisfied with the retention and esthetics of their dentures. Polyetherketoneketone double crown-retained RPDs demonstrate better retention one year after clinical functional use.

  1. Öwall B, Käyser AF, Carlsson GE. Prosthodontics: principles and management strategies. 7th ed. London: Mosby-Wolfe1996.9p.
  2. Hakkoum MA, Wazir G. Telescopic Denture. Open Dent J 2018;12(1):246–254. DOI: 10.2174/1874210601812010246.
  3. Wataha JC. Alloys for Prosthodontic Restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87(4):351–363. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2002.123817.
  4. Diwan R, Talic Y, Omar N, et al. Pattern Waxes and Inaccuracies in Fixed and Removable Partial Denture Castings. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77(5):553–555. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(97)70152-5.
  5. Janeva NM, Kovacevska G, Elencevski S, et al. Advantages of CAD/CAM versus Conventional Complete Dentures-A Review. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2018;6(8):1498–1502. DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2018.308.
  6. Kamel A, Badr A, Fekry G, et al. Parameters Affecting the Retention Force of CAD/CAM Telescopic Crowns: A Focused Review of In Vitro Studies. J Clin Med 2021;10(19):4429. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10194429.
  7. Papathanasiou I, Kamposiora P, Papavasiliou G, et al. The Use of PEEK in Digital Prosthodontics: A Narrative Review. BMC Oral Health 2020;20(1):217. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01202-7.
  8. Alqurashi H, Khurshid Z, Syed AUY, et al. Polyetherketoneketone (PEKK): An Emerging Biomaterial for Oral Implants and Dental Prostheses. J Adv Res 2020;28:87–95. DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.09.004.
  9. Brown T, Bao B, Kilpela T, et al. An In Vitro Biotribological Assessment of NUBAC, a Polyetheretherketone-On-Polyetheretherketone Articulating Nucleus Replacement Device: Methodology and Results from a Series of Wear Tests Using Different Motion Profiles, Test Frequencies, and Environmental Conditions. Spine J 2010;35(26): 774–781. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d59e45.
  10. Park C, Jun J, Park W, et al. Use of Polyaryletherketone (PAEK) Based Polymer for Implant-Supported Telescopic Overdenture: A Case Report. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9(1):74–76. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2017.9.1.74.
  11. Shetty S, Shenoy K, Shetty R, et al. PEKK (Polyetherketoneketone) as a Prosthetic Material- A review. Int J Recent Sci 2018;9(4):25724–25726. Available from:
  12. Gautam C, Joyner J, Gautam A, et al. Zirconia Based Dental Ceramics: Structure, Mechanical Properties, Biocompatibility and Applications. Dalton Trans 2016;45(48):19194–19215. DOI: 10.1039/c6dt03484e.
  13. Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, et al. Parameters Affecting Retentive Force of Electroformed Double-Crown Systems. Clin Oral Investig 2010;14(2):129–135. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-009-0271-7.
  14. Schubert O, Reitmaier J, Schweiger J, et al. Retentive Force of PEEK Secondary Crowns on Zirconia Primary Crowns Over Time. Clin Oral Investig 2019;23:2331–2338 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2657-x.
  15. Emera RM, Abelkhalek S, Rashed M. Periodic Retention Evaluation of Two Implants Retained Complete Mandibular Overdenture with Zirconia-PEEK Telescopic Attachments. J Dent Sci 2019;18:15–24. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1803141524.
  16. Emera RM, Altonbary G, Elbashir S. Comparison between All Zirconia, All PEEK, and Zirconia-PEEK Telescopic Attachments for Two Implants Retained Mandibular Complete Overdentures: In Vitro Stress Analysis Study. J Dent Imp 2019;9:24.15. DOI: 10.4103/jdi.jdi_6_19.
  17. Emera RM, Elgamal M, Albadwei M. Surface wear of All Zicronia, All PEEK and Zirconia-Peek Telescopic Attachments for Two Implants Retained Mandibular Complete Overdentures. In-Vitro study using scanning electron microscope. J Dent Sci 2019;18:59–68. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1802095665.
  18. Elsarrif HR, Mohamed SH, Sabet ME. Effect of Different Techniques of CAD/CAM designed BIOHPP Frameworks on the Supporting Structures of Kennedy Class I Telescopic Partial Denture Cases. Egypt Dent J 2021 Oct;67(4):3393–3402. DOI: 10.21608/edj.2021.76015.1677.0.
  19. Emera RM, Khalifa A, Ahmed WS, et al. Clinical Outcome of Two Implants Retained Complete Mandibular Overdenture with Zirconia-PEEK Telescopic Attachment. Int J Curr Adv Res 2019;8:19540–19546. DOI: 10.24327/ijcar.2019.
  20. Kotthaus M, Hasan I, Keilig L, et al. Investigation of the Retention Forces of Secondary Telescopic Crowns Made from Pekkton® Ivory in Combination with Primary Crowns Made from Four Different Dental Alloys: An In Vitro Study. Biomed Tech 2019;64(5):555–62. DOI: 10.1515/bmt-2018-0167.
  21. El Mekawy N, Gad E. Retentive Force and Surface Roughness of Partial Removable Frameworks Fabricated from Conventional Chrome-Cobalt and CAD/CAM Modified Polyetheretherketone Materials (Within-Subject Evaluation). Egypt Dent J 2016;62: 5055–5062. DOI: 10.30476/edj.2016.76015.1677.0.
  22. Faul, Franz, et al. G* Power 3: A Flexible Statistical Power Analysis Program for the Social, Behavioral, and Biomedical Sciences. Behav Res Methods 2007;39.2:175–191. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.
  23. Su N, Yue L, Liao Y, et al. The Effect of Various Sandblasting Conditions on Surface Changes of Dental Zirconia and Shear Bond Strength Between Zirconia Core and Indirect Composite Resin. J Adv Prosthodont 2015;7(3):214–223. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2015.7.3.214.
  24. Langer A. Telescope Retainers and Their Clinical Application. J Prosthet Dent 1980;44(5):516–522. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(80)90070-0.
  25. Wenz HJ, Hertrampf K, Lehmann KM. Clinical Longevity of Removable Partial Dentures Retained by Telescopic Crowns: Outcome of the Double Crown with Clearance Fit. Int J Prosthodont 2000;19(3): 207–213. PMID: 11484566.
  26. Tamimi F, Almufleh B, Caron E, et al. Digital Removable Partial Dentures. Clin Dent Rev 2020;4(9):24–29. DOI: 10.1007/s41894-020-00074-y.
  27. Maryod W, Taha E. Retention of Removable Partial Denture Fabricated by Digital Designing and 3D Printing Technology-A Cross over Study. Advan Dent & Oral Health 2019;10(3):555–789. DOI: 10.19080/ADOH.2019.10.555789.
  28. Faty MA, Sabet ME, Thabet YG. A Comparison of Denture Base Retention and Adaptation between CAD-CAM and Conventional Fabrication Techniques. Int J Prosthodont 2021 DOI: 10.11607/ijp.7193.
  29. Merk S, Wagner C, Stock V, et al. Suitability of Secondary PEEK Telescopic Crowns on Zirconia Primary Crowns: The Influence of Fabrication Method and Taper. Materials (Basel) 2016;9(11):908–912. DOI: 10.3390/ma9110908.
  30. Stawarczyk B, Taufall S, Roos M, et al. Bonding of Composite Resins to PEEK: The Influence of Adhesive Systems and Air-abrasion Parameters. Clin Oral Investig 2018;22(2):763–771. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-017-2151-x.
  31. Colón A, Kotwal K, Mangelsdorff AD. Analysis of the Posterior Palatal Seal and the Palatal form as Related to the Retention of Complete Dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1982;47(1):23–27. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(82)90237-2.
  32. Wang Y, Wang P, Xu Q, et al. Synthesis and Properties of Novel Copolymers of Poly (Ether Ketone Biphenyl Ketone Ether Ketone Ketone) and Poly (Ether Ketone Sulfone Amide). J Polym Res 2014;21(8):533. DOI: 10.1002/pi.6181.
  33. Bayer S, Zuziak W, Kraus D, et al. Conical Crowns with Electroplated Gold Copings: Retention Force Changes Caused by Wear and Combined Off-Axial Load. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22(3):323–329. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02003.x.
  34. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital Dentistry: An Overview of Recent Developments for CAD/CAM Generated Restorations. Br Dent J 2008;204(9):505–511. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.350.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.