A comparative study of retention of cement retained implant prosthesis cemented with different luting cements: An in-vitro study

P. Anilkumar; Dishita S. Chokhani; Suhas K. Mangrulkar; Ishita Gupta; Raja Singh; Sonu Kumar

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6nS3.8335

Authors

P. Anilkumar
aneelcool@gmail.com
Professor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Nanded Rural Dental College and Research Centre, Nanded
Dishita S. Chokhani Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Nanded Rural Dental College and Research Centre, Nanded
Suhas K. Mangrulkar PG student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, K. D. Dental College & Hospital, Mathura
Ishita Gupta PG student, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Subharti Dental College and Hospital
Raja Singh Consultant Prosthodontist and Implantologist, Lokpriya Hospital Meerut
Sonu Kumar Consultant Prosthodontist and Implantologist, Apollo Hospital Kolkata

Keywords:

Acrylic urethane cement, implant luting cements, resin-based temporary cement, tensile strength

Abstract

Purpose: The study was conducted to evaluate the retentiveness of specifically formulated implant cements and compare its retentiveness with a commonly used noneugenol zinc oxide luting cement and also to assess the influence of abutment height on the retentiveness of these cements. Materials and Methods: A master stainless steel mold was used to mount snappy abutment-implant analog complex in acrylic resin. A total of six stock abutments (Osstem TS^®) of 4 mm and 5.5 mm height with their analogs were used. A total of 66 ceramill^® Sintron metal copings fabricated using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing system and divided into six groups (n = 11) according to the height (three 4 mm abutment and three 5.5 mm abutment). The cements that were compared were a Noneugenol zinc oxide provisional cement , Dual Cure Resin Cement and a Zinc Phosphate Cement . After cementation samples were immersed in artificial saliva for 7 days and subjected to a pull-out test using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The load required to de-cement each coping was recorded and analyzed using one-way ANOVA, post hoc multiple comparison, and independent t-test.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Manawar A, Dhanasekar B, Aparna IN, Naim H. Factors influencing success of cement versus screw-retained implant restorations: A clinical review. J Osseointegration. 2012;4:43–7.

Singer A, Serfaty V. Cement-retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures: A 6-month to 3-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996;11:645–9.

Chee W, Jivraj S. Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations. Br Dent J. 2006;201:501–7.

Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: A critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18:719–28.

Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: Achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77:28–35.

Tarica DY, Alvarado VM, Truong ST. Survey of United States dental schools on cementation protocols for implant crown restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;103:68–79.

Kapoor R, Singh K, Kaur S, Arora A. Retention of implant supported metal crowns cemented with different luting agents: A comparative in vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:ZC61–4.

Garg P, Gupta G, Prithviraj DR, Pujari M. Retentiveness of various luting agents used with implant-supported prostheses: A preliminaryin vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:82–4.

Bernal G, Okamura M, Muñoz CA. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont. 2003;12:111–5.

Chandra Shekar S, Giridhar K, Suhas Rao K. An in vitro study to evaluate the retention of complete crowns prepared with five different tapers and luted with two different cements. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2010;10:89–95.

Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13:343–8.

Farah R, Elzeky M. An in vitro comparison of marginal microleakage of four groups of temporary cements in provisional crowns. Int J Adv Res. 2015;3:778–87.

Dantas TS, das Neves FD, do Prado CJ, Naves LZ, Muniz LA. Effects of abutment taper on the uniaxial retention force of cement retained implant restorations. Rev Odontol Bras Cent. 2013;22:110–4.

Meshramkar R, Nayak A, Kavlekar A, Nadiger R, Lekha K. A study to evaluate the effect of taper on retention of straight and angled implant abutment. J Dent Implants. 2015;5:3.

Sheets JL, Wilcox C, Wilwerding T. Cement selection for cement-retained crown technique with dental implants. J Prosthodont. 2008;17:92–6.

Akca K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli MC .Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns .Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants .2002;17:536–542

Al Hamad KQ, Al Rashdan BA, Abu-Sitta EH. The effects of height and surface roughness of abutments and the type of cement on bond strength of cement-retained implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:638–44

Akça K, Iplikçioǧlu H, Cehreli MC. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17:536–42.

Kent DK, Koka S, Froeschle ML. Retention of cemented implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont. 1997;6:193–6.

Covey DA, Kent DK, St Germain HA, Jr, Koka S. Effects of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:344–8.

Kunt GE, Ceylon G, Yilmaz N. Effect of surface treatments on implant crown retention. J Dent Sci. 2010;5:131–5.

Jørgensen KD. The relationship between retention and convergence angle in cemented veneer crowns. Acta Odontol Scand. 1955;13:35–40.

Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16:793–8.

Jain JK, Sethuraman R, Chauhan S, Javiya P, Srivastava S, Patel R, et al. Retention failures in cement- and screw-retained fixed restorations on dental implants in partially edentulous arches: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2018;18:201–11.

Shrivastav M. Effect of surface treatments on the retention of implant-supported cement-retained bridge with