A comparison of retentive strength of implant cement depending on various methods of removing provisional cement from implant abutment

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

PURPOSE. This study evaluated the effectiveness of various methods for removing provisional cement from implant abutments, and what effect these methods have on the retention of prosthesis during the definitive cementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Forty implant fixture analogues and abutments were embedded in resin blocks. Forty cast crowns were fabricated and divided into 4 groups each containing 10 implants. Group A was cemented directly with the definitive cement (Cem-Implant). The remainder were cemented with provisional cement (Temp-Bond NE), and classified according to the method for cleaning the abutments. Group B used a plastic curette and wet gauze, Group C used a rubber cup and pumice, and Group D used an airborne particle abrasion technique. The abutments were observed using a stereomicroscope after removing the provisional cement. The tensile bond strength was measured after the definitive cementation. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance test (α=.05). RESULTS. Group B clearly showed provisional cement remaining, whereas the other groups showed almost no cement. Groups A and B showed a relatively smooth surface. More roughness was observed in Group C, and apparent roughness was noted in Group D. The tensile bond strength tests revealed Group D to have significantly the highest tensile bond strength followed in order by Groups C, A and B. CONCLUSION. A plastic curette and wet gauze alone cannot effectively remove the residual provisional cement on the abutment. The definitive retention increased when the abutments were treated with rubber cup/pumice or airborne particle abraded to remove the provisional cement.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Breeding LC, "Use of luting agents with an implant system: Part I" 68 : 737-741, 1992

2 Brookshire FV, "The qualitative effects of various types of hygiene instrumentation on commercially pure titanium and titanium alloy implant abutments: an in vitro and scanning electron microscope study" 78 : 286-294, 1997

3 Lingard GL, "The interaction between lining materials and composite resin restorative materials" 8 : 121-129, 1981

4 Marshall SJ, "The influence of various cavity bases on the micro-hardness of composites" 27 : 291-295, 1982

5 Oilo G, "The influence of surface roughness on the retentive ability of two dental luting cements" 5 : 377-389, 1978

6 Felton DA, "The effect of surface roughness of crown preparations on retention of cemented castings" 58 : 292-296, 1987

7 Al-Zain SA, "The effect of different metal cleaning methods on retention of cast crowns" 52 : 2087-2092, 2006

8 Koka S, "The effect of cementing agent and technique on the retention of a CeraOne gold cylinder: a pilot study" 4 : 32-35, 1995

9 Ramp MH, "Tensile bond strengths of provisional luting agents used with an implant system" 81 : 510-514, 1999

10 Button GL, "Surface preparation and shear bond strength of the casting-cement interface" 53 : 34-38, 1985

11 Mehl C, "Retrievability of implant-retained crowns following cementation" 19 : 1304-1311, 2008

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

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

14 Cobb DS, "Metal surface treatment: characterization and effect on compositeto-metal bond strength" 25 : 427-433, 2000

15 Erkut S, "Karabulut E. Influence of previous provisional cementation on the bond strength between two definitive resin-based lut-ing and dentin bonding agents and human dentin" 32 : 84-93, 2007

16 Ayad MF, "Influence of tooth surface roughness and type of cement on retention of complete cast crowns" 77 : 116-121, 1997

17 Kanakuri K, "Influence of temporary cement remnant and surface cleaning method on bond strength to dentin of a composite luting system" 47 : 9-13, 2005

18 Peutzfeldt A, "Influence of eugenol-containing temporary cement on efficacy of dentin-bonding systems" 107 : 65-69, 1999

19 Grasso CA, "In vivo evaluation of three cleansing techniques for prepared abutment teeth" 88 : 437-441, 2002

20 Augthun M, "In vitro studies on the effect of cleaning methods on different implant surfaces" 69 : 857-864, 1998

21 Kreisler M, "In vitro evaluation of the biocompatibility of contaminated implant surfaces treated with an Er : YAG laser and an air powder system" 16 : 36-43, 2005

22 Razzoog ME, "In vitro analysis of the effects of two air-abrasive prophylaxis systems and inlet air pressure on the surface of titanium abutment cylinders" 3 : 103-107, 1994

23 Taylor TD, "Implant prosthodontics: cur-rent perspective and future directions" 15 : 66-75, 2000

24 Dario LJ, "Implant angulation and position and screw or cement retention: clinical guidelines" 5 : 101-104, 1996

25 Schneider RL, "Evaluation of the retention of castings to endosseous dental implants" 58 : 73-78, 1987

26 Speelman JA, "Evaluation of different methods to clean titanium abutments. A scanning electron microscopic study" 3 : 120-127, 1992

27 Tuntiprawon M, "Effect of tooth surface roughness on marginal seating and retention of complete metal crowns" 81 : 142-147, 1999

28 Juntavee N, "Effect of surface roughness and cement space on crown retention" 68 : 482-486, 1992

29 Homiak AW, "Effect of hygiene instrumentation on titanium abutments: a scanning electron microscopy study" 67 : 364-369, 1992

30 Weber HP, "Does the type of implant prosthesis affect outcomes in the partially edentulous patient" 22 : 140-172, 2007

31 Rosenstiel SF, "Contemporary fixed prosthodontics" Mosby 229-, 2006

32 Akça K, "Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns" 17 : 536-542, 2002

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

34 Chee W, "Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: which is better" 14 : 137-141, 1999

35 Hebel KS, "Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry" 77 : 28-35, 1997

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

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

38 Mengel R, "An in vitro study of the treatment of implant surfaces with different instruments" 13 : 91-96, 1998

39 Bain CA, "An in vitro and in vivo evaluation of various implant-cleaning instruments" 29 : 423-427, 1998

40 Mosharraf R, "A simple method for cleaning zinc oxide-eugenol provisional cement residues from the intaglio surface of casting restorations" 91 : 200-, 2004