The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A modified technique for extraoral cementation of implant retained restorations for preventing excess cement around the margins

  • Yuzbasioglu, Emir (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Istanbul Medipol University)
  • Received : 2013.12.23
  • Accepted : 2014.03.24
  • Published : 2014.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The major drawback of cement-retained restorations is the extrusion of the excess cement into the peri-implant sulcus, with subsequent complications. Insufficient removal of the excess cement may initiate a local inflammatory process, which may lead to implant failure. This article presents a method of controlling cement flow on implant abutments, minimizing the excess cement around implant-retained restorations.

Keywords

References

  1. Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Tissue-Integrated Prosthesis: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago; Quintessence Publishing; 1985.
  2. Wannfors K, Smedberg JI. A prospective clinical evaluation of different single-tooth restoration designs on osseointegrated implants. A 3-year follow-up of Brånemark implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:453-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100603.x
  3. Eckert SE, Wollan PC. Retrospective review of 1170 endosseous implants placed in partially edentulous jaws. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:415-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70155-6
  4. Avivi-Arber L, Zarb GA. Clinical effectiveness of implantsupported single-tooth replacement: the Toronto Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:311-21.
  5. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:719-28.
  6. Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70203-8
  7. Jones JD, Kaiser DA. A new gingival retraction impression system for a one-stage root-form implant. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:371-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70139-8
  8. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd ed. St. Louis; MO; Mosby-Year Book Inc; 1999. p. 549-73.
  9. Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Bogacki MT, Tietge JD. Use of lut- ing agents with an implant system: Part I. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:737-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90194-F
  10. Quirynen M, De Soete M, van Steenberghe D. Infectious risks for oral implants: a review of the literature. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:1-19. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130101.x
  11. Lee A, Okayasu K, Wang HL. Screw- versus cement-retained implant restorations: current concepts. Implant Dent 2010;19:8-15. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3181bb9033
  12. Pauletto N, Lahiffe BJ, Walton JN. Complications associated with excess cement around crowns on osseointegrated implants: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:865-8.
  13. Gapski R, Neugeboren N, Pomeranz AZ, Reissner MW. Endosseous implant failure influenced by crown cementation: a clinical case report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:943-6.
  14. Wilson TG Jr. The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol 2009;80:1388-92. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090115
  15. Agar JR, Cameron SM, Hughbanks JC, Parker MH. Cement removal from restorations luted to titanium abutments with simulated subgingival margins. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:43-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70086-6
  16. Dumbrigue HB, Abanomi AA, Cheng LL. Techniques to minimize excess luting agent in cement-retained implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:112-4. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.119418
  17. Schwedhelm ER, Lepe X, Aw TC. A crown venting technique for the cementation of implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:89-90. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2003.66
  18. Wadhwani C, Pineyro A. Technique for controlling the cement for an implant crown. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:57-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60102-5

Cited by

  1. Effect of dental cements on peri-implant microbial community: comparison of the microbial communities inhabiting the peri-implant tissue when using different luting cements vol.27, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12582
  2. A Novel Universal Cementation Technique for Implant-Supported Crowns with Subgingival Margins vol.26, pp.7, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12450
  3. Clinical applications of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tape in restorative dentistry vol.222, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.110
  4. A Prosthesis Retention System for Full-Arch, Fixed, Implant-Supported Prosthesis pp.1059941X, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12972
  5. The Conometric Concept: A Two-Year Follow-Up of Fixed Partial CEREC Restorations Supported By Cone-In-Cone Abutments pp.1059941X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12962
  6. Impact of dental cement on the peri-implant biofilm-microbial comparison of two different cements in an in vivo observational study vol.20, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12650
  7. Investigation of the effects of cement in different thicknesses and mechanical properties on implant with zirconia crown: A finite element analysis vol.12, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4103/jioh.jioh_348_19
  8. Cleaning Efficacy of Poly-ether-ether-ketone Tips in Eliminating Cement Remnants Around Implants With Different Abutment Heights vol.46, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-19-00095
  9. Comparing effectiveness of rubber dam and gingival displacement cord with copy abutment in reducing residual cement in cement‐retained implant crowns: A crossover RCT vol.32, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13724