Hypobaric Conditions and Retention of Dental Crowns Luted with Manually or Automixed Dental Cements

BACKGROUND: There is only scant information on the influence of the hypobaric environment on luting agents and their efficacy on dental crown cementation. The objective of this study was to provide data on the retentive characters of two cements commonly used on implant abutment surfaces both under normal and under hypobaric conditions.METHODS: There were 56 implant abutments supplied with CAD/CAM milled zirconia oxide crowns. 1) A zinc phosphate cement (ZP), and 2) a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGI), each mixed either A) manually or B) by means of automix capsules, were used for cementation. The cemented crowns of the 4 × 2 subgroups were either kept on the ground or were transported in an aircraft at altitudes up to 13,730 m (45,045.9 ft; N = 28 each), thus being subjected to the pressure changes (80×) every aircrew member or frequent flyer is exposed to. All cemented crowns were stored in climatized boxes during the experimental phase.RESULTS: Hand-mixing of ZP resulted in a significant reduction of mean (± SD) retention forces (581.6 ± 204.5 N) when compared to the control group on the ground (828.4 ± 147.9 N). Automixed ZP (931.9 ± 134.4 N in flight; 996.0 ± 107.4 N on the ground) and RMGI subgroups (ranging from 581.0 N ± 114.3 N to 662.4 N ± 92.5 N) were not affected by hypobaric conditions.DISCUSSION: When treating patients frequently exposed to hypobaric environments, automixing of ZP would seem favorable, while manual mixing should be avoided. RMGI is considered suitable and is not influenced by hand-mixing or barometric pressure changes.Kielbassa AM, Müller JAG. Hypobaric conditions and retention of dental crowns luted with manually or automixed dental cements. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2018; 89(5):446-452.