Browse > Article

Retention of CAD/CAM Metal Copings Cemented on Short Titanium Abutments with Different Cements  

Kim, Hyo-Jung (Department of Dentistry, Inha University School of Medicine)
Song, Eun-Young (Department of Dentistry, Inha University School of Medicine)
Yoon, Ji-Young (Department of Dentistry, Inha University School of Medicine)
Lee, Si-Ho (Department of Dentistry, Inha University School of Medicine)
Lee, Yong-Keun (Department of Dental Biomaterials and Bioengineering, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Oh, Nam-Sik (Department of Dentistry, Inha University School of Medicine)
Publication Information
Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science / v.28, no.2, 2012 , pp. 119-126 More about this Journal
Abstract
State of problem: Cement-retained implant-supported prostheses are routinely used in dentistry. The use of high strength cements has become more popular with the increasing confidence in the stability of the implant-abutment screw connection and the high survival rates of osseointegrated implants. No clinical data on retention of metal copings using CAD/CAM. To evaluate retention of metal copings using CAD/CAM system bonded to short titanium abutment with four different cements and compare retentive strength of metal copings with sandblasting or without sandblasting before cementation. Forty titanium abutment blocks were fabricated and divided into 4 groups of 10 samples each. Forty metal copings with occlusal hole to allow for retention testing were fabricated using CAD/CAM technology. The four cements were Fujicem(Fuji, Japan), Maxcem Elite(Kerr, USA), Panavia F2.0(Kurarary, Japan) and Superbond C&B(Sunmedical, Japan). The copings were cemented on the titanium abutment according to manufacture's recommendation. All samples were stored for 24h at 37oC in 100% humidity and tested for retention using universal testing machine(Instron) at a crosshead speed of 1.0mm/min. Force at retentive failure was recorded in Newton. The mode of failure was also recorded. Means and standard deviations of loads at failure were analyzed using ANOVA and Paired t-test. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. Panavia F2.0 provided significantly higher retentive strength than Fujicem, Maxcem Elite(P<0.05). Sandblasting significantly increased bond strength(P<0.05). The mode of failure was cement remaining principally on metal copings. Within the limitation of this study, Panavia F2.0 showed significantly stronger retentive strength than Fujicem, Maxcem Elite(p<0.05). The Ranking order of the cements to retain the copings was Panavia F2.0, Fujicem = Maxcem Elite. Sandblasting significantly increased bond strength(P<0.05). The retentive strength of metal copings on implant abutment were influenced by surface roughness and type of cements.
Keywords
Retention; CAD/CAM; Resin cement; Implant;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Al Hamad KQ, Al Rashdan BA, Abu-Sitta EH. The effects of height and surface roughness of abutments and the type of cement on bond strength of cement-retained implant restorations. Clin Oral Implant Res 2011;22(6):638-644
2 Ergin S, Gemalmaz D. Retentive properties of five different luting cements on base and noble metal copings. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88:491-497
3 Maeyama H, Sawase T, Jimbo R, Kamada K, Suketa N, Fukui J. & Atsuta M. Retentive strength of metal copings on prefabricated abutments with with five different cements. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005; 7(4):229-234
4 Sadig WM, Al Hardi MW. Effects of surface conditioning on the retentiveness of titanium crowns over short implant abutments. Implant Dent 2007; 16(4):387-396
5 Kanchanavasita W, Anstice HM, Pearson GJ. Longterm flexural strength of resin modified glass ionomer cements Biomaterials 1998; 19(18):1703-13
6 Johnson GH, Lepe X, Zhang H, Wataha JC. Retention of metal-ceramic crowns with contemporary dental cements. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140(9):1125-1136
7 Taira Y, Yoshida K, Matsumura H, Atsuta M. Phosphate and thiophosphate primers for bonding prosthodontic luting materials to titanium. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79(4):384-388
8 Abreu A, LozaMA, Elias A et al. Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 101(2):107-118
9 Yang TJ, Lim JH, Jo IH. A research examining the impacts of non-precious alloy surface treatments and the different types of resin cements on tensile bonding strength. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics. 1996;34:335.
10 Ebert A, Hedderich J, Kern M. Retention of zirconia ceramic copings bonded to titanium abutments. J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22(6): 921-927 (abstract)
11 Ernst CP,Wenzl N,Stender E,Willershausen B. Influence of different luting concepts on long term retentive strength of zirconia crown. Am J Dent 2009 22(2):122-128
12 Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cementretained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofacial Implants 2003; 18(5):719-728
13 Bindl A, Mormann WH. Marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic CAD/CAM crown-copings on chamfer preparations. J Oral Rehabil 2005; 32:441-447
14 Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screwretained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77(1):28-35
15 Covey DA, Kent DK, St Germain HA Jr, Koka S. Effect of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83:344-348
16 Abbo Bill, Razzoog ME, Vivas Jose, Sierraalta Marianella. Resistance to dislodgement of zirconia copings cemented onto titanium abutments of different heights. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 99:25-29
17 Grenade Charlotte, Mainjot Amelie, Vanheusden Alain. Fit of single tooth zirconia copings: comparison between various manufacturing processes. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105:249-255
18 Han H.S, Yang H.S, Lim H.P, Park Y.J. Marginal accuracy and internal fit of machine-milled and cast titanium crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 106:191-197
19 Palacios RP, Johnson GH, Phillips KM, Raigrodski AJ. Retention of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns with three types of cement. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96(2):104-114
20 Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents TD. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002; 13:343-348