The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments

Abstract

Self-adhesive resin cement exhibited superior retention compared to temporary cement, regardless of crown material. Co-Cr and titanium presented higher levels of retention to Ti-base abutment after being cemented.

Retention of zirconia crowns to Ti-base abutments: effect of luting protocol, abutment treatment and autoclave sterilization.

“…Hence, CAD/CAM compatible titanium base abutments (Ti-base) have been used as a platform for subsequent milling of customized ceramic prostheses that are cemented chairside to the Ti-base and screwed to the implant [9][10][11][12]. This hybrid retention Ti-base concept advantages include esthetics, reproduction of a tailored emergence profile to reestablish soft tissue anatomic contour, retrievability, improved biomechanical performance, absence of ceramic material at the implant-abutment connection level, as well as, bonding procedure under controlled laboratory conditions [7,[16][17][18][19].…”

“…Cementation is a critical procedure for implant-supported reconstructions as titanium and Y-TZP are commonly used interfaces that challenge conventional adhesive bonding due to the high opacity and inadequate photopolymerization, as well as, the inefficiency of common surface pretreatments on polycrystalline surfaces involving silica coating (up to 5% retention loss after 5 years) [1][2][3][4][5][20][21][22][23]. The bond strength of implant-supported prostheses has previously shown to be influenced by abutment material, height and convergence angle, prostheses adaptation, surface pretreatment, cement type, and cement degradation rate [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31]; however, there is limited scientific evidence concerning the bonding behavior of different luting systems to hybrid Ti-base reconstructions [16,17,31]. As previously evaluated, the retentive strength of resin cement resulted in up to threefold higher force to dislodgment relative to temporary and glass ionomer cement, irrespective of crown material and resin cement type [16,17].…”

“…The bond strength of implant-supported prostheses has previously shown to be influenced by abutment material, height and convergence angle, prostheses adaptation, surface pretreatment, cement type, and cement degradation rate [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31]; however, there is limited scientific evidence concerning the bonding behavior of different luting systems to hybrid Ti-base reconstructions [16,17,31]. As previously evaluated, the retentive strength of resin cement resulted in up to threefold higher force to dislodgment relative to temporary and glass ionomer cement, irrespective of crown material and resin cement type [16,17]. Moreover, self-adhesive resin cements have emerged as a novel and simplified luting technology relative to conventional resin cement, with bonding performance yet to be elucidated when used to bond Y-TZP to Ti-base abutments [16,17,32,33].…”

Comparison of peri‐implant clinical outcomes of digitally customized and prefabricated abutments: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…In addition, customized abutments can be used to improve the restoration's emergence profile, in cases with poor implant angulation. Otherwise, the over‐contoured abutment has been suggested as potentially leading to peri‐implant marginal bone loss and soft tissue recession 6 …”

Three-dimensional misfit between Ti-Base abutments and implants evaluated by replica technique

“…1,2 Implant abutments that are tailored for CAD-CAM use, such as Ti-base, allow for digital design and milling of customized restorations to be extraorally cemented and screwed to the implant. 3 The advantages of this technique include emergency profile customization, time efficiency with reduced costs, hybrid retention mechanism (cemented and screwed) that allows excess cement removal, and improved photocuring of the restoration margins prior to screwing. 4,5 An important factor affecting the survival of The silicon replicas were individually scanned using a microcomputed tomography scanner (μCT X-Ray microfocus CT scanner; SkyScan).…”