You are here

Home » Content

FARKLI SİMANLARIN İMPLANTÜSTÜ KURON PROTEZLERİNİN TUTUCULUĞUNA ETKİSİ

Effect of Cement Type on Retention of Implant-Supported Crowns

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the retentive strength of implant cements with conventionally used cements. Materials and Methods: Standard titanium abutment was scanned by means of a 3D digital laser scanner. 40 standard metal copings were designed by a CAD/CAM system. Copings were cemented to the abutments using 1 of 4 luting cements (n=10) as (1) Premier Implant Cement (PIC), (2) TempBond NE (TB), (3) Multilink Implant (MI), (4) Adhesor Carbofine (AC). Copings were subjected to a pull-out test using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Decementation load was analyzed with Oneway Anova and Tukey HSD tests at a confidence interval of 95%. Results: Cement groups showed statistically significant difference (p<0.01). Mean retentive strength of the groups were ranked as : TB (39,65±8,08 N), PIC (136,97±21,75 N), MI (301,60±28,43 N), AC (386,78±52,63 N). Conclusions: Decementation loads for the cements specifically formulated for usage with implant-supported restorations, were higher than that of conventional temporary cement and lower than that of conventional permanent cement.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı, restorasyonları implant postuna yapıştırma amacıyla özel olarak üretilmiş reçine bazlı sunanları tutuculuk direnci açısından geleneksel simanlarla karşılaştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Standart implant postu üç boyutlu dijital lazer tarayıcı ile tarandı. CAD/CAM sistemi yardımıyla 40 adet standart alt yapı üretildi. Alt yapılar her grupta 10 adet örnek olacak şekilde 4 farklı simanla (1) Premier Implant Cement (PIC), (2) TempBond NE (TB), (3) Multilink Implant (MI), (4) Adhesor Carbofine (AC) simante edildi. Örnekler üniversal test cihazı yardımıyla 0.5 mm/ dak hızda çekme testine tabi tutuldu. Desimantasyona sebep olan kuvvet miktarı Oneway Anova ve Tukey HSD testleri yardımıyla 95% güven aralığında değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Grupların tutuculuk düzeyleri arasında istatistiksel olarak ileri düzeyde anlamlı farklılık bulundu (p<0.01). Simanların retansiyon değerleri en düşükten yükseğe doğru şu şekilde sıralandı: TB (39,65±8,08 N), PIC (136,97±21,75 N), MI (301,60±28,43 N), AC (386,78±52,63 N). Sonuç: İmplant-destekli protezlerin simantasyonu için özel olarak geliştirilen reçine bazlı simanlar, geleneksel geçici simana oranla daha yüksek, geleneksel daimi simana göre ise daha düşük retantif özelliklere sahiptir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-farkli-simanlarin-implantustu-kuron-protezlerinin-tutuculuguna-etkisi.pdf
  • 1
43
52
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, Cor-
diol
i G. Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2004 Mar-Apr; 19(2): 260-65.
2.
Meh
l C, Harder S, Wolfart M, Kern M, Wolfart S. Retrievability of implant-retained crowns following cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2008 Dec; 19(12): 1304-11.
3.
Michalaki
s KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained
implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2003; 18: 719-28.
4.
Santos
a RE, Martin W, Morton D. Effects of a cementing technique in addition to luting agent on the uniaxial retention force of a single-tooth implant-supported restoration: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2010 Nov-Dec; 25(6): 1145-52.
5.
Assenz
a B, Scarano A, Leghissa G, Carusi G, Thams U, Roman FS, Piatel-li A. Screw- vs cement-implant-retained restorations:an experimental study in the beagle. Part 1. Screw and abutment loosening. Journal of Oral Implantology, 2005; 31: 242-46.
6.
Torrado
E
, Ercoli C, Al Mardini M, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L. A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent, 2004 Jun ;91(6): 532-37.
7.
Pa
n YH, Ramp LC, Lin CK, Liu PR. Comparison of 7 luting protocols and their effect on the retention and marginal leakage of a cement-retained dental implant restoration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2006 Jul-Aug; 21(4): 587-92.
8.
Squie
r RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2001 Nov-Dec; 16(6):
793-98.
9.
Berna
l G, Okamura M, Muñoz CA. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont, 2003; 12(2): 111-15.
10.
Heintz
e SD. Crown pull-off test (crown retention test) to evaluate the bonding effectiveness of luting agents. Dent Mater,
2010; 26: 193-206.
11.
Wolfar
t M, Wolfart S, Kern M. Re¬tention forces and seating discrepancies of
51
implant-retained castings after cementation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2006; 21: 519-25.
12. Kokubo Y, Kano T, Tsumita M, Sa-kurai S, Itayama A, Fukushima S. Retention of zirconia copings on zirconia implant abutments cemented with provisional luting agents. J Oral Rehabil, 2010 Jan; 37(1): 48¬53.
13. Heinemann F, Mundt T, Biffar R. Retrospective evaluation of temporary cemented, tooth and implant supported fixed partial dentures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2006; 34(2): 86-90.
14. Pan YH, Ramp LC, Lin CK, Liu PR. Retention and leakage of implant-supported restorations luted with provisional cement: a pilot study. J Oral Rehabil, 2007; 34(3): 206-12.
15. Psillakis JJ, McAlarney ME, Wright RF, Urquiola J, MacDonald DE. Effect of evaporation and mixing technique on die spacer thickness: a preliminary study. J Prosthet Dent, 2001; 85(1): 82-87.
16. Olivera AB, Saito T. The effect of die spacer on retention and fitting of complete cast crowns. J Prosthodont, 2006 Jul-Aug; 15(4): 243-49.
17. Phillips R. Skinner's science of dental materials. 9 th ed, Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1991: p.44-50.
18. Grajower R, Lewinstein I. A mathematical treatise on the fit of crown castings. J Prosthet Dent, 1983 May; 49(5): 663-74.
19. Passon C, Lambert RH, Lambert RL, Newman S. The effect of multiple layers of die-spacer on crown retention. Oper Dent, 1992 Mar-Apr; 17(2): 42-49.
20. Campbell SD. Comparison of conventional paint-on die spacers and those used with the all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent, 1990 Feb; 63(2): 151-55.
21. Emtiaz S, Goldstein G. Effect of die
P. Gultekin, B. Alper Gultekin
spacers on precementation space of comple¬te coverage restorations. Int J Prosthodont, 1997; 10: 131-35.
22. Fusayama T, Ide K, Hosoda H. Relief of resistance of cement of full cast crowns. J Prosthet Dent, 1964; 14: 95-106.
23. Webb LE, Murray HV, Holland GA, Taylor DF. Effect of preparation, relief and flow channels on seating full coverage castings during cementation. J Prosthet Dent, 1983; 49: 777-80.
24. Abbo B, Razzoog ME, Vivas J, Si-erraalta M. Resistance to dislodgement of zirconia copings cemented onto titanium abutments of different heights. J Prosthet
Dent, 2008 Jan; 99(1): 25-29.
25. Razzoog ME, Lang LA, McAndrew KS. AllCeram crowns for single replacement implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent, 1997
Nov; 78(5): 486-89.
26. Strub JR, Rekow ED, Witkowski S.
Computer-aided design and fabrication of dental restorations: current systems and fu¬ture possibilities. J Am Dent Assoc, 2006 Sep; 137(9): 1289-96.
27. Michalakis K, Pissiotis AL, Kang K, Hirayama H, Garefis PD, Petridis H. The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2007 Jul-Aug; 22(4): 569-74.
28. Sheets JL, Wilcox C, Wilwerding T.
Cement selection for cement-retained crown technique with dental implants. J Prosthodont, 2008 Feb; 17(2): 92-96. Epub 2007
Oct 30.
29. Jacob SJ, Hegde C, Prasad KD, Shetty M. An in vitro study to evaluate the effect of storage time and application of subsequent layers on the variation in thickness of three commercially available die spacers. Indian
52
Farklı Simanların İmplantüstü Kuron Protezlerinin Tutuculuğuna Etkisi
J Dent Res, 2010 Jan-Mar; 21(1): 92-97.
30.
Mansou
r A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tal-lents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. Clin Oral Impl Res, 2002; 13: 343-48.
31.
Akc
a K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli MC. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2002; 17: 536-42.
32.
GaRe
y DJ, Tjan AH, James RA, Caputo AA. Effects of thermocycling, load-cycling, and blood contamination on cemented implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent, 1994 Feb; 71(2): 124-32.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com