PURPOSE To determine the effect of the cement type and abutment material on the tensile strength required to dislodge zirconia copings. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two experimental groups of abutments were prepared: (1) titanium abutments (n = 30) and (2) zirconia abutments (n = 30). Sixty zirconia copings (custom designed) were fabricated using 3-dimensional computer-assisted design to have a 6-mm projection above the abutment to accommodate a hole, through which a wire was inserted to attach the zirconia coping to a universal testing machine. Each abutment was placed onto an implant analog embedded in acrylic resin blocks to fit onto the universal testing machine. The zirconia copings were cemented onto the abutments with a provisional luting agent, zinc phosphate (ZP) cement, and adhesive resin cement, and after 5500 thermocycles, a tensile force was applied at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The removal force was recorded for each specimen. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and 1-way ANOVA were used for the statistical analysis (P < 0.05). RESULTS The mean forces necessary to remove the zirconia copings from titanium abutments were 6.52, 83.09, and 251.18 N for temporary cement, ZP cement, and resin cement, respectively. For zirconia abutments, the required forces were 17.82, 116.41, and 248.72 N. CONCLUSIONS The abutment material had no effect on retention, but the cement type affected the retention of the zirconia copings.

Objective:The aim of this study was 2-fold. The first aim was to evaluate the effects of mixing technique (hand-mixing or auto-mixing) on bacterial attachment to polyether impression materials. The second aim was to determine whether bacterial attachment to these materials was affected by length of exposure to disinfection solutions.Materials and Methods:Polyether impression material samples (n = 144) were prepared by hand-mixing or auto-mixing. Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were used in testing. After incubation, the bacterial colonies were counted and then disinfectant solution was applied. The effect of disinfection solution was evaluated just after the polymerization of impression material and 30 min after polymerization. Differences in adherence of bacteria to the samples prepared by hand-mixing and to those prepared by auto-mixing were assessed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. For evaluating the efficiency of the disinfectant, Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test was used.Results:E. coli counts were higher in hand-mixed materials (P < 0.05); no other statistically significant differences were found between hand- and auto-mixed materials. According to the Kruskal-Wallis test, significant differences were found between the disinfection procedures (Z > 2.394).Conclusion:The methods used for mixing polyether impression material did not affect bacterial attachment to impression surfaces. In contrast, the disinfection procedure greatly affects decontamination of the impression surface.