Aim:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retention values and marginal adaptation of implant-supported metal copings using different luting agents. Material and Method:Forty implant fixtures and solid abutments of 7mm height were embedded vertically in epoxy resin blocks. Metal copings with a loop on the occlusal surface were fabricated using base metal alloy. The copings were luted using four different cements (Multilink N, Fuji Plus, Fuji1 and Adhesor) under static load of 5kg (n=10). All specimens were subjected to 1000 thermal cycles between 5˚c and 55˚c with a dwell time of 10 seconds in a thermocycling device. Marginal accuracy was detected before and after cementation of all specimens by stereomicroscope. TheTensile force required to dislodge the copings were determined by a computer controlled universal testing machine with a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/ min.The force in Newton(N) required to remove the copings was recorded. Data was collected and statistically analyzed.Results: Multilink N and Fuji1 had the highest and the least mean retentive strength respectively. There was no significant difference between MultilinkN, Fuji Plus and Adhesor. The absolute marginal discrepancies of cements were in reducing order zinc phosphate , resin modified glass ionomer, glass ionomer and resin cement.Conclusion: within the conditions of this study, resin cement, the resin modified glass ionomer and zinc phosphate had statistically the same retentive quality and are recommended for definitive cementation of single implant-supported restoration. Different luting media had a definite effect over the final fit of all metal copings, but they were all within the clinically accepted level of 100 µm.
Marginal accuracy and retention of all-ceramic crowns are crucial prerequisites for their long-term survival. Meanwhile, the innovative revolution of adhesive cementation has led to uncountable number of recent brands through which the dentist has to choose.The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of two different tapering
Purpose: The present study was conducted both in-vivo and in-vitro. The aim was to evaluate the trueness and precision of three-dimensional datasets acquired from digital impressions by chair-side intraoral scanning, or extraoral scanning of the impressions and gypsum casts of completely edentulous patient with multiple implants (All-on-4 protocol). Materials and Methods: Test groups of the in-vivo study: Group (I): (IOS n=5) Direct digital scans using intraoral digital impression technique, Group (II) :(IMPR IL n=5) Digital scans of the conventional implant level impressions using extraoral scanner, Group (III):(CAST IL n=5) Digital scans of the stone casts-obtained from the conventional implant level impressions, Group (IV):(IMPR AL n=5) Digital scans of the conventional abutment level impressions using extraoral scanner and Group(V): (CAST AL n=5) Digital scans of the stone casts-obtained from the conventional abutment level impressions. Test groups of the in-vitro study: Control group: reference scan of the resin master models, Group (I): (IOS n=5) Direct digital scans of the master model using intraoral scanner, Group (II): (IMPR IL n=5) Digital scans of the conventional implant level impressions using extraoral scanner, Group(III):(CAST IL n=5) Digital scans of the stone casts-obtained from the conventional implant level impressions, Group (IV):(IMPR AL n=5) Digital scans of the conventional abutment level impressions, using extraoral scanner and Group (V): (CAST AL n=5) Digital scans of the stone casts-obtained from the conventional abutment level impressions. All STL datasets (IOS 1-5, IMPR 1-10 and CAST 1-10) for both in-vivo and invitro studies were imported into industrial reverse engineering software. The distance data were saved as an STL file and imported into a statistical program. The measurements were noted in tables and compared with the same measurements made with other scans. Results: The results of the in-vivo study revealed that the highest agreement (reliability-precision) between distance measurements was found with Group 1 (IOS), while the lowest agreement was found with Group 5 (CAST-AL) [insignificant difference] However; all Cronbach's alpha coefficients showed very good Codex : 18/1804
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.