Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering

ozyilmaz, ozgun yusuf; SEVİMAY, MÜJDE; Akın, Ceyda

Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering

Özgün Yusuf ÖZYILMAZ, (İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Protetik Diş Tedavisi Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul)

Ceyda AKIN, (Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Protetik Diş Tedavisi Anabilim Dalı, Konya)

Müjde SEVİMAY (Selçuk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Protetik Diş Tedavisi Anabilim Dalı, Konya)

Selcuk Dental Journal

2 0

Yıl: 2017 Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 10 - 16 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering

Öz:

Lazer sinterize yoluyla üretilen implant destekli kronların tutuculuklarında siman aralığının ve simanların etkisi Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı iki farklı siman aralığı ile yapılan implant destekli kronlar için kullanılan beş farklı simanın tutuculuk mukavemetini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Standart titanyum dayanaklar dijital bir 3D lazer tarayıcı aracılığıyla tarandı. 100 standart metal alt yapı bir CAD/CAM sistem aracılığıyla iki farklı siman aralığı değerinde (20 ve 40 µm) tasarlandı. Alt yapılar beş farklı siman kullanılarak yapıştırıldı (n=10). Poly F (PF), GC FujiCEM (GCF), Rely X (RX), MIS Crown Set(MCS) and Multilink N (MN). Örnekler 24 saat bekletildikten sonra 1000 devir termal siklus uygulandı. Termal siklustan sonra örnekler universal test cihazında 0.5 mm/dk. hızla çekme testine tabi tutuldu. Test sonuçları iki yönlü varyans analizini takiben tamhane testleri kullanılarak çoklu karşılaştırmalarla analiz edildi (?=0.05). Bulgular: İstatistiksel analiz değerlendirildiğinde siman grupları arasında anlamlı farklılıklar görüldü (p<0.05). PF ve MN sırasıyla en yüksek ve en düşük tutuculuk kuvveti ortalamasına sahipti. RX ve MCS arasında anlamlı farklılık bulunmadı. 20 den 40µm ye artan siman aralığı, her siman grubu için tutuculuğu anlamlı ölçüde arttırdı (p<0.05). Sonuç: Çalışmada sunulan simanların klinisyenler için, implant dayanakların üzerine üretilen CAD/CAM metal alt yapılar için uygun siman seçimini belirlemede isteğe bağlı bir rehber olması amaçlanmıştır

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Diş Hekimliği

Lazer sinterize yoluyla üretilen implant destekli kronların tutuculuklarında siman aralığının ve simanların etkisi

Öz:

Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implantsupported crowns fabricated by laser sinteringBackground: The aim of this study was to evaluate the retentionstrength of five different cements used for implant supported crownswith two cement gap values.Methods: Standard titanium abutments were scanned by means of a3D digital laser scanner. 100 standard metal copings were designedby a CAD/CAM system with two cement gap values (20 and 40µm).The copings were cemented to the abutments using the followingfive cements (n=10). Poly F (PF), GC FujiCEM (GCF), Rely X (RX),MIS Crown Set(MCS) and Multilink N (MN). The specimens wereplaced in 100% humudity for 24 hours then specimens were thermalcycled 1000 times. After thermal cycling specimens were subjectedto a pull-out test using a universal testing machine at a 0.5 mm/mincrosshead speed. The test results were analyzed with two-wayANOVA, followed by multiple comparisons using Tamhane tests(α=0.05).Results: Statistical analysis revealed that significant differences wereobserved among cement groups (p<0.05). PF and MN had thehighest and the least mean retentive strength, respectively. Nosignificant difference was found between RX and MCS. Increasingthe cement gap from 20 to 40 µm improved retention significantly foreach cement group (p<0.05).Conclusion: The ranking of cements presented in the study is meantto be an arbitrary guide for the clinician in deciding the appropriatecement selection for CAD/CAM fabricated metal copings ontoimplant abutments

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Diş Hekimliği

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. 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.
2. Chee W, Felton DA, Johnson PF, Sullivan DY. Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: which is beter? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14: 137-141.
3. Taylor TD, Agar JR, Vogiatzi T. Implant prosthodontics: current perspective and future directions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000; 15: 66-75.
4. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cementretained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 719-28.
5. Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 260- 5.
6. Weber HP, Sukotjo C. Does the type of implant prosthesis affect outcomes in the partially edentulous patient ? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 140-72.
7. Mehl C, Harder S, Wolfart M, Kern M Wolfart S. Retrievability of implant-retained crowns following cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 1304- 11.
8. Santosa RE, Martin W, Morton D. Effects of a cementing technique in addition to luting agent on the uniaxial retention force of a single-tooth implantsupported restoration: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25: 3145-52.
9. Assenza B, Scarano A, Leghissa G, Carusi G, Thams U, Roman FS et al. Screw-vs cementimplant-retained restorations: an experimental study in the beagle. Part 1. Screw and abutment loosening. J Oral Implantol 2005; 31: 242-46.
10.Torrado E, Ercoli C, Al Mardini M, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L. A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 532-37.
11.Edelhoff D, Ozcan M. To what extent does the longevity of fixed dental prostheses depend on the function of the cement? Working Group 4 materials: cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 193- 204.
12.Pan YH, Ramp LC, Lin CK, Liu PR. Comparison of 7 luting protocols and their effect on the retention and marginal leakage of a cement retained dental implant restoration. Int J Oral Maxillofac 2006; 21: 587-92.
13.Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants2001;16: 793-98.
14.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: 111-15.
15.Heintze SD. Crown pull-off test (crown retention test) to evaluate the bonding effectiveness of luting agents. Dent Mater 2010; 26: 193-206.
16.Wolfart M, Wolfart S, Kern M. Retention forces and seating discrepancies of implant retained castings after cementation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 519-25.
17.Kokubo Y, Kano T, Tsumita M, Sakurai S, Itayama A, Fukushima S. Retention of zirconia copings on zirconia implant abutments cemented with provisional luting agents. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37: 48-53.
18.Psillakis JJ, McAlarney ME, Wright RF, Urquiola J, MacDonald DE. Effect of evaporation and mixing technique on die spacer thickness: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 82-7.
19.Wu JC, Wilson PR. Optimal cement space for resin luting cements. Int J Prosthodont 1994; 7: 209-15.
20.Phillips R. Skinner’s Science of Dental Materials 1991;44-50.
21.Grajower R, Lewinstein I. A mathematical treatise on the fit of crown castings. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 49: 663-74.
22.Passon C, Lambert RH, Lambert RL, Newman S. The effect of multiple layers of die-spacer on crown retention. Oper Dent 1992; 17: 42-9.
23.Campbell SD. Comparison of conventional paint-on die spacers and those used with the all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 63: 151-55.
24.Emtiaz S, Goldstein G. Effect of die spacers on precementation space of complete coverage restorations. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:131-35.
25.Fusayama T, Ide K, Hosoda H. Relief of resistance of cement of full cast crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1964; 14: 95-106.
26.Webb LE, Murray HV, Holland GA Taylor DF. Effect of preparation, relief and flow channels on seating full coverage castings during cementation. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 49: 777-80.
27.Ucar Y, Akova T, Akyıl MS, Brantley WA. Internal fit evaluation of crowns prepared using a new dental crown fabrication technique: lasersintered Co-Cr crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 102: 253-59.
28.Akova T, Ucar Y, Tukay A, Balkaya MC, Brantley WA. Comparison of the bond strength of lasersintered and cast base metal dental alloys to porcelain. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 1400-4.
29.Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M. Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 1311-15.
30.Örtorp A, Jönsson D, Mouhsen A, Vult von Steyern P. The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 356-63.
31.Abbo B, Razzoog ME, Vivas J, Sierraalta M. Resistance to dislodgement of zirconia copings cemented onto titanium abutments of different heights. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 99: 25-9.
32.Strub JR, Rekow ED, Witkowski S. Computeraided design and fabrication of dental restorations: current systems and future possibilities. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:1289-96.
33.Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using ITI solid abutment with six cements. Clin Oral Impl Res 2002; 13: 343-8.
34.Darvell BW. Materials Science for dentistry. 2002;7th edition, (ISBN 962-85391-5-9).
35.Schissel C, Schaefer L, Winter C, Fuerst J, Rosentritt M, Zeman F, Behr M. Factors determining the retentiveness of luting agents used with metal-and ceramic-based implant components. Clin Oral Invest 2013; 17: 1179-90.
36.Hotz P, McLean JW, Sced I, Wilson AD. The bonding of glass ionomer cements to metal and tooth substrates. Br Dent J 1977; 142: 41-7.
37.Annusavice KJ. Science of dental materials 2006;10th edition, St Louis, Saunders, 471-5.
38.Monticelli F, Grandini S, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Clinical behavior of translucent-fiber posts: a 2- year prospective study. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16: 593-6.
39.Schwartz RS, Robbins JW. Placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: Aliterature review. J Endod 2004; 30: 289-301.
40.Monticelli F, Osorio R, Mazzitelli C, Ferrari M, Toledano M. Limited decalcification/diffusion of self-adhesive cements into dentin. J Dent Res 2008; 87: 974-9.
41.Ebert A, Hedderich J, Kern M. Retention of zirconia ceramic copings bonded to titanium abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 921-7.
42.Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent 1999; 27: 89-9.
43.Clayton GH, Driscoll CF, Hondrum SO. The effect of luting agents on the retention and marginal adaptation of the CeraOne implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997; 12: 660-5.
44.White SN, Sorensen JA, Kang SK, Caputo AA. Microleakage of new crown and fixed partial denture luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67: 156-161.
45.GaRey DJ, Tjan AH, James RA, Caputo AA. Effects of thermocycling, load-cycling, and blood contamination on cemented implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1994; 71: 124-132.
46.O’Brien WJ. Dental cements. In: O’Brien WJ, ed. Dental Materials: Properties and Selection. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co 1989: 538-542.
47.Akça K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli MC. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002; 17: 536-42.
48.Pan YH, Ramp LC, Lin CK, Liu PR. Retention and leakage of implant-supported restorations luted with provisional camant: a pilot study. J Oral Rehabil 2007; 34: 206-12.
49.Razzoog ME, Lang LA, McAnsrew KS. AllCeram crowns for single replacement implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 78: 486-9.
50.OliveraAB, Saito T. The effect of die spacer on retention and fitting of complete cast crowns. J Prosthodont 2006; 15: 243-9.
51.Kim Y, Yamashita J, Shotwell JL, Chong KH, Wang HL. The comparison of provisional luting agents and abutment surface roughnes on the retention of provisional implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 95: 450-5.
52.Michalakis K, Pissiotis AL, Kang K, Hirayama H, Garefis PD, Petridis H. The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used fort he cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 569-74.

APA	ozyilmaz o, Akın C, SEVİMAY M (2017). Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. , 10 - 16.
Chicago	ozyilmaz ozgun yusuf,Akın Ceyda,SEVİMAY MÜJDE Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. (2017): 10 - 16.
MLA	ozyilmaz ozgun yusuf,Akın Ceyda,SEVİMAY MÜJDE Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. , 2017, ss.10 - 16.
AMA	ozyilmaz o,Akın C,SEVİMAY M Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. . 2017; 10 - 16.
Vancouver	ozyilmaz o,Akın C,SEVİMAY M Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. . 2017; 10 - 16.
IEEE	ozyilmaz o,Akın C,SEVİMAY M "Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering." , ss.10 - 16, 2017.
ISNAD	ozyilmaz, ozgun yusuf vd. "Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering". (2017), 10-16.

APA	ozyilmaz o, Akın C, SEVİMAY M (2017). Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. Selcuk Dental Journal, 4(1), 10 - 16.
Chicago	ozyilmaz ozgun yusuf,Akın Ceyda,SEVİMAY MÜJDE Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. Selcuk Dental Journal 4, no.1 (2017): 10 - 16.
MLA	ozyilmaz ozgun yusuf,Akın Ceyda,SEVİMAY MÜJDE Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. Selcuk Dental Journal, vol.4, no.1, 2017, ss.10 - 16.
AMA	ozyilmaz o,Akın C,SEVİMAY M Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. Selcuk Dental Journal. 2017; 4(1): 10 - 16.
Vancouver	ozyilmaz o,Akın C,SEVİMAY M Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering. Selcuk Dental Journal. 2017; 4(1): 10 - 16.
IEEE	ozyilmaz o,Akın C,SEVİMAY M "Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering." Selcuk Dental Journal, 4, ss.10 - 16, 2017.
ISNAD	ozyilmaz, ozgun yusuf vd. "Effect of luting space and cements on retention of implant supported crowns fabricated by laser sintering". Selcuk Dental Journal 4/1 (2017), 10-16.