Effect of Cementation Technique on Retention of All Ceramic Crowns Cemented to Zirconia and Titanium Implant Abutments: A Comparative in Vitro Study

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the retention of lithium disilicate crowns cemented by resin cement on zirconia and titanium implant abutments coated with glycerin and eugenol. Materials and Methods: Forty implant analogs were embedded in forty blocks of epoxy resin. Twenty implant a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:NeuroQuantology 2022-05, Vol.20 (5), p.911-917
Hauptverfasser: Ahmed, Mohamed T., Mohsen, Cherif A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the retention of lithium disilicate crowns cemented by resin cement on zirconia and titanium implant abutments coated with glycerin and eugenol. Materials and Methods: Forty implant analogs were embedded in forty blocks of epoxy resin. Twenty implant analogs received a zirconia implant abutment to which 20 IPS e.max press crowns were cemented. The other twenty implant analogs received a titanium implant abutment to which 20 IPS e.max press crowns were cemented. According to the cementation technique, the samples were subdivided into two groups, 10 samples each. In Gp A, zirconia implant abutments’ surfaces were coated with a single coat of eugenol before cementing crowns with the permanent resin luting cement. In Gp B, same as in Gp B with replacement of eugenol with single coat of glycerin. In Gp C, Titanium implant abutments’ surfaces were coated with a single coat of eugenol before cementing crowns with the permanent resin luting cement. In Gp D, same as in Gp C with replacement of eugenol with single coat of glycerin. Each sample was subjected to a pull-out test. Loads required to remove the crowns were recorded, and mean values for each group determined. Data were statistically analyzed. Results: The mean values ±SD of loads at failure (n -10) for each group were as follows in Newton (N): Group(A) 141.9±17.9, Group(B) 134±14.5, Group(C) 140.5±17, Group(D) 143.6±12.4. All groups showed statistically insignificant difference in retention (p
ISSN:1303-5150
1303-5150
DOI:10.14704/nq.2022.20.5.NQ22342