Influence of abutment height and surface roughness on in vitro retention of three luting agents
Answers
Answered by
0
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effects of abutment height, airborne-particle abrasion, and type of cement on the tensile resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained implant restorations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of 12 standardized abutments each were prepared with different heights (4 mm, 5 mm, and 6 mm) using a milling machine. Crowns were cast in cobalt-chrome using the lost-wax technique, airborne particle-abraded using 50-Μm aluminum oxide, and cleaned with acetone. Restorations were cemented using a noneugenol acrylic urethane cement, a resin-modified glass ionomer, or a zinc oxide-noneugenol cement. A 5-kg load was applied for 10 minutes. Samples were kept at 37°C and 100% humidity overnight. A tensile force was applied to the crown using a testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/minute until failure occurred. Next, the abutments were airborne particle-abraded with 50-Μm aluminum oxide, and the cementation and testing procedures were repeated. The effects of cement, abutment height, and surface treatment were evaluated statistically.
RESULTS: There were significant differences among the cements. The resin-modified glass ionomer provided the greatest retention in all the tested conditions, while the zinc oxide-noneugenol cement produced the lowest retention values. Significant differences were also detected between 4-mm and 6-mm abutments, with the 6-mm abutments being more retentive. No differences were found between 4-mm and 5-mm abutments or between 5-mm and 6-mm abutments. The effect of airborne-particle abrasion was also found to be significant. A maximum increase of 90 N in retention force was observed after airborne-particle abrasion for the 5-mm abutments cemented with the acrylic urethane cement.
CONCLUSIONS: Cement, airborne-particle abrasion, and abutment height can significantly influence retention of implant-supported crowns. Different parameters, including those specific to the patient, should be considered in the selection of a luting agent.
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effects of abutment height, airborne-particle abrasion, and type of cement on the tensile resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained implant restorations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of 12 standardized abutments each were prepared with different heights (4 mm, 5 mm, and 6 mm) using a milling machine. Crowns were cast in cobalt-chrome using the lost-wax technique, airborne particle-abraded using 50-Μm aluminum oxide, and cleaned with acetone. Restorations were cemented using a noneugenol acrylic urethane cement, a resin-modified glass ionomer, or a zinc oxide-noneugenol cement. A 5-kg load was applied for 10 minutes. Samples were kept at 37°C and 100% humidity overnight. A tensile force was applied to the crown using a testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/minute until failure occurred. Next, the abutments were airborne particle-abraded with 50-Μm aluminum oxide, and the cementation and testing procedures were repeated. The effects of cement, abutment height, and surface treatment were evaluated statistically.
RESULTS: There were significant differences among the cements. The resin-modified glass ionomer provided the greatest retention in all the tested conditions, while the zinc oxide-noneugenol cement produced the lowest retention values. Significant differences were also detected between 4-mm and 6-mm abutments, with the 6-mm abutments being more retentive. No differences were found between 4-mm and 5-mm abutments or between 5-mm and 6-mm abutments. The effect of airborne-particle abrasion was also found to be significant. A maximum increase of 90 N in retention force was observed after airborne-particle abrasion for the 5-mm abutments cemented with the acrylic urethane cement.
CONCLUSIONS: Cement, airborne-particle abrasion, and abutment height can significantly influence retention of implant-supported crowns. Different parameters, including those specific to the patient, should be considered in the selection of a luting agent.
Similar questions