The selection criteria of temporary or permanent luting agents in implant-supported prostheses: in vitro study

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

PURPOSE
The use of temporary or permanent cements in fixed implant-supported prostheses is under discussion. The objective was to compare the retentiveness of one temporary and two permanent cements after cyclic compressive loading.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The working model was five solid abutments screwed to five implant analogs. Thirty Cr-Ni alloy copings were randomized and cemented to the abutments with one temporary (resin urethane-based) or two permanent (resin-modified glass ionomer, resin-composite) cements. The retention strength was measured twice: once after the copings were cemented and again after a compressive cyclic loading of 100 N at 0.72 Hz (100,000 cycles).
RESULTS
Before loading, the retention strength of resin composite was 75% higher than the resin-modified glass ionomer and 2.5 times higher than resin urethanebased cement. After loading, the retentiveness of the three cements decreased in a non-uniform manner. The greatest percentage of retention loss was shown by the temporary cement and the lowest by the permanent resin composite. However, the two permanent cements consistently show high retention values.
CONCLUSION
The higher the initial retention of each cement, the lower the percentage of retention loss after compressive cyclic loading. After loading, the resin urethane-based cement was the most favourable cement for retrieving the crowns and resin composite was the most favourable cement to keep them in place.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Bernal G, "The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations" 12 : 111-115, 2003

2 Michalakis K, "The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures" 22 : 569-574, 2007

3 Clayton GH, "The effect of luting agents on the retention and marginal adaptation of the CeraOne implant system" 12 : 660-665, 1997

4 Kaar D, "The effect of fatigue damage on the force required to remove a restoration in a cement-retained implant system" 15 : 289-294, 2006

5 Ongthiemsak C, "The effect of compressive cyclic loading on retention of a temporary cement used with implants" 31 : 115-120, 2005

6 Alfaro MA, "Short-term retention properties of cements for retrievable implant-supported prostheses" 12 : 33-37, 2004

7 Garg P, "Retentiveness of various luting agents used with implant-supported prostheses:a preliminary in vitro study" 26 : 82-84, 2013

8 Nejatidanesh F, "Retentiveness of implant-supported metal copings using different luting agents" 9 : 13-18, 2012

9 Squier RS, "Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components" 16 : 793-798, 2001

10 Maeyama H, "Retentive strength of metal copings on prefabricated abutments with five different cements" 7 : 229-234, 2005

11 Bresciano M, "Retention of luting agents on implant abutments of different height and taper" 16 : 594-598, 2005

12 Kent DK, "Retention of cemented implant-supported restorations" 6 : 193-196, 1997

13 Dudley JE, "Retention of cast crown copings cemented to implant abutments" 53 : 332-339, 2008

14 Wolfart M, "Retention forces and seating discrepancies of implant-retained castings after cementation" 21 : 519-525, 2006

15 Pan YH, "Retention and leakage of implant-supported restorations luted with provisional cement:a pilot study" 34 : 206-212, 2007

16 Chaar MS, "Prosthetic outcome of cementretained implant-supported fixed dental restorations: a systematic review" 38 : 697-711, 2011

17 Koolstra JH, "Prediction of volumetric strain in the human temporomandibular joint cartilage during jaw movement" 209 : 369-380, 2006

18 Nissan J, "Longterm outcome of cemented versus screw-retained implantsupported partial restorations" 26 : 1102-1107, 2011

19 Cano-Batalla J, "Influence of abutment height and surface roughness on in vitro retention of three luting agents" 27 : 36-41, 2012

20 Hallgren C, "Histomorphometric and mechanical evaluation of the bonetissue response to implants prepared with different orientation of surface topography" 3 : 194-203, 2001

21 Akashia AE, "Effects of different types of temporary cements on the tensile strength and marginal adaptation of crowns on implants" 4 : 309-315, 2002

22 Covey DA, "Effects of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant-supported crowns" 83 : 344-348, 2000

23 Proussaefs P, "Crowns cemented on crown preparations lacking geometric resistance form. Part II: effect of cement" 13 : 36-41, 2004

24 Pan YH, "Comparison of 7 luting protocols and their effect on the retention and marginal leakage of a cement-retained dental implant restoration" 21 : 587-592, 2006

25 Mansour A, "Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements" 13 : 343-348, 2002

26 Vigolo P, "Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study" 19 : 260-265, 2004

27 Sailer I, "Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions:a systematic review of the survival and complication rates" 23 : 163-201, 2012

28 Michalakis KX, "Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review" 18 : 719-728, 2003

29 Sheets JL, "Cement selection for cement-retained crown technique with dental implants" 17 : 92-96, 2008

30 Michalakis KX, "Cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures" 15 : 545-549, 2000

31 Chandra Shekar S, "An in vitro study to evaluate the retention of complete crowns prepared with five different tapers and luted with two different cements" 10 : 89-95, 2010

32 Shadid R, "A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review" 38 : 298-307, 2012