Effects of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant-supported crowns

Covey, David; Kent, Dennis K.; Germain, H. A. St; Koka, Sreenivas

doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70138-7

Cited by 91 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…36,37 Recently, some reports have shown that the bond strength of zirconium oxide ceramics can be improved only by airborne-particle abrasion for the ceramic surface and the use of a composite resin cement containing an adhesive phosphate monomer. [38][39][40][41] Nejatidanesh et al 42 evaluated the effects of different surface-treatment methods on the removal force of implant-supported zirconium oxide copings on short abutments, and they found that silicoating can improve the retentive value of zirconia copings more than Al 2 O 3 airborne-particle abrasion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their performances were compared in vitro in relation to the tensile bond strength between the substrate and the ceramic lithium disilicate implant abutment of ITI/Straumann before and after thermocycling. These cements were chosen using as references studies that used similar representatives of these cementing agent groups, applied to the tooth substrate 34,35 over other types of implants 8 or on Straumann/ITI, Waldenburg, Switzerland, especially for the use of metallic coping 20,23,31 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of luting agent on the bond strength of ceramic-based lithium disilicate and titanium abutment subjected to artificial aging

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the bond strength (BS) of a ceramic coping-abutment implant interface according to the luting agent, before and after thermal cycling (TC). Methodology: Forty ceramic copings and abutments (Ti) were divided into four groups (n=10): OZ (zinc oxide eugenol free), PZ (zinc phosphate), GIC (resin modified glass ionomer), and RC (adhesive resin cement). BS test was performed using a universal testing machine before and after TC. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test (p<0.05) were performed for the means. Results: The results showed that before TC, the values ranged from 50.77 N (OZ) to 240.21 N (GIC). After TC, the values showed intermediate results -3.5 N (OZ) and 330.66 N (RC), 90.58 N (PZ), and 280.43 N (GIC). OZ performed the worst, both before and after TC. Before TC, GIC had the highest value. After TC, RC had the highest value of BS. Conclusions: The aging process influenced and inverted the results of the GIC and RC groups, and had a greater negative impact on the OZ group.

show abstract

“…The choice of luting agent may directly affect the long-term success of the implant restorations. 3,[7][8][9] Cemented restorations have become a popular alternative and exhibit the following advantages over screwretained restorations: a. Provide resistance to rotational forces that cause loosening, as in screw-retained designs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have reported the effect of abutment size (diameter and height) on the retentiveness of the prosthesis but no clear conclusion has been drawn. 9,14 Thus, studying the retentive abilities of these cements on implant abutments of varying sizes (diameter) may provide some new insights into their behavior and clinical applications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention of Metal Crowns Luted to Implant Abutments of Two Different Diameters using Different Luting Agents

Matani¹,

Parulekar²,

Kheur³

et al. 2012

International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The desirable properties of a luting agent used for implant prostheses are adequate tensile strength for retention and at the same time render the crowns to be retrievable. No studies have reported a comparison of the retention of implant crowns luted with zinc phosphate and polymeric cements. Studying the retentive abilities of these cements utilizing varying sizes of implant abutments may provide new insights into their clinical behaviors. Aim:To compare the retentive abilities of two luting agents, using them to lute crowns on implant abutments of different diameters. Materials and methods:Two implants (3.7 and 6.0 mm diameter) were embedded in a resin block. Straight abutments of corresponding diameters were screwed into the implants. The height of abutments was kept equal for both abutments (8 mm). Seven copings were fabricated for each abutment. Groups 1 and 2 copings (14 copings) were tested for both luting agents; zinc phosphate and polymeric cement using a universal testing machine.Results: For the abutment diameters tested, the retentive values of zinc phosphate was significantly greater than polymeric implant cement. For the broad abutment, zinc phosphate was significantly more retentive than polymeric implant cement. For the narrow abutment, retentive values of zinc phosphate and polymeric implant cement were almost similar. Conclusion:The retentive values of zinc phosphate were significantly greater than polymeric implant cement. For broad abutment, zinc phosphate was more retentive whereas for narrow abutment, retentive values were almost similar.

show abstract

Effects of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant-supported crowns

Cited by 91 publications

References 11 publications

Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments

Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments

Effect of luting agent on the bond strength of ceramic-based lithium disilicate and titanium abutment subjected to artificial aging

Retention of Metal Crowns Luted to Implant Abutments of Two Different Diameters using Different Luting Agents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About