Effects of abutment diameter, luting agent type, and re-cementation on the retention of implant-supported CAD/CAM metal copings over short abutments
PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of abutment diameter, cement type, and re-cementation on the retention of implant-supported CAD/CAM metal copings over short abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty abutments with two different diameters, the height of which was reduced to 3...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The journal of advanced prosthodontics 2018, Vol.10 (1), p.1-7 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | kor |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of abutment diameter, cement type, and re-cementation on the retention of implant-supported CAD/CAM metal copings over short abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty abutments with two different diameters, the height of which was reduced to 3 mm, were vertically mounted in acrylic resin blocks with matching implant analogues. The specimens were divided into 2 diameter groups: 4.5 mm and 5.5 mm (n=30). For each abutment a CAD/CAM metal coping was manufactured, with an occlusal loop. Each group was sub-divided into 3 sub-groups (n=10). In each subgroup, a different cement type was used: resin-modified glass-ionomer, resin cement and zinc-oxide-eugenol. After incubation and thermocycling, the removal force was measured using a universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. In zinc-oxide-eugenol group, after removal of the coping, the cement remnants were completely cleaned and the copings were re-cemented with resin cement and re-tested. Two-way ANOVA, post hoc Tukey tests, and paired t-test were used to analyze data (${\alpha}=.05$). RESULTS. The highest pulling force was registered in the resin cement group (414.8 N), followed by the re-cementation group (380.5 N). Increasing the diameter improved the retention significantly (P=.006). The difference in retention between the cemented and recemented copings was not statistically significant (P=.40). CONCLUSION. Resin cement provided retention almost twice as strong as that of the RMGI. Increasing the abutment diameter improved retention significantly. Re-cementation with resin cement did not exhibit any difference from the initial cementation with resin cement. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2005-7806 2005-7814 |