Mechanical Behavior and Fracture Loads of Screw‐Retained and Cement‐Retained Lithium Disilicate Implant‐Supported Crowns

Camatta, Hercules Pessin; Ferreira, Rodrigo Melim; Ferrairo, Brunna Mota; Strelhow, S. S. F.; Rubo, José Henrique; Mori, Aline Akemi; Ferruzzi, Fernanda

doi:10.1111/jopr.13298

Cited by 9 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The examined fatigue of monolithic single-implant restorations of LDS on a central incisor compared to the same restorations cemented on a tooth shows the highest survival rate in the test group of implants, which confirms that this type of superstructure could successfully withstand the masticatory forces in the oral cavity but should be used carefully, according to the indications and the clinical situation [2,4,[9][10][11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Fatigue Loading Test on Screw-Retained Lithium Disilicate Crowns Adhesively Cemented on Titanium Abutment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess the mechanical behavior and the microleakage of crown abutments made of lithium disilicate (LDS), adhesively bonded to preconditioned titanium bonding base under dynamic loading considering the type of teeth incisors, premolars, and molars. Thirty-three monolithic LDS implant supra-structures, representing a copy of natural tooth morphology (central incisor, second premolar, or first molar) were fabricated and bonded to titanium bases, screw-retained on the implant, and subjected to dynamic loading of 250,000 loading cycles at 2 Hz. After mechanical cycling, specimens were immersed in 5% methylene blue solution for 24 h at 37 °C. Microleakage was evaluated under magnification. The presence or absence of the following parameters were also evaluated: abutment screw deformation, abutment deformation, crack or craze line on the ceramic structure, adhesive failure between titanium base and ceramic superstructure, failures in ceramic superstructure or titanium base, and remaining cement around titanium base and ceramic superstructure. Considering the type of teeth, there are eight defects in relation to the group of central incisors, whereas the group of first molars accounts for seven defects. The second premolar is the worst performer with eleven defects. Significant accumulation of dye was registered in all teeth groups, i.e., grade 2 (staining around hexagonal area of the connection), according to the applied scale. Failure of hybrid abutments could be related to the correct seal between the titanium base and the ceramic restorations. The type of teeth could also be related to the presence of failures.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Fatigue Loading Test on Screw-Retained Lithium Disilicate Crowns Adhesively Cemented on Titanium Abutment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reason for this particular finding deserves further research. Several authors attributed better outcomes to SR than to CR i-FPDs [7,[11][12][13]16,[20][21][22]38], while CR wearers manifested higher OHRQoL than did SR wearers in other study [31]. The causes of such disparities may rely on the patients' features and on the QoL predictors in each case [47].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, given that the screw channels interrupt the structural integrity of the restorations, the aesthetics, implants' axial load, occlusal stability, and ceramic strength may be negatively affected. Moreover, the screw loosening or fracture may occur as a consequence of an incorrect design, an inadequate occlusion, or an insufficient pre-load, among others [6,7,[13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Role of the modulating factors on the self-perceived OHRQoL of fully dentate subjects and wearers of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported FPDs: A cross-sectional study’

Castillo-Oyagüe

Río

Preciado

et al. 2022

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, cement-retained restorations are the most frequently used restoration in the case of inclined implants with respect to the prosthetic ideal axis, or in the case of non-parallel implants solidarized in the same prosthetic structure [ 11 , 12 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Cementation Techniques to Minimize Cement Excess in Cement-Retained Implant Restorations

Reda

Zanza

Cicconetti

et al. 2022

MPs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The most used types of retention of implant-supported prostheses are screw-retained or cement-retained restorations. The advantages and disadvantages of both have been identified by various authors over the years. However, cement-retained implant crowns and fixed partial dentures are among the most used types of restorations in implant prostheses, due to their aesthetic and clinical advantages. When cemented prostheses are made on implants, the problem of cement residues is important and often associated with biological implant pathologies. The objective of this research was to establish to what extent the techniques to reduce excess cement really affect the volume of cement residues. Materials and Methods: This review was written following the PRISMA statement; a detailed search was carried out in three different electronic databases—PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. The inclusion criteria were prospective clinical studies, with at least 10 participants per group, and with at least 6 months of the follow-up period. Results: There have been many proposals for techniques supposed to reduce the amount of excess cement in the peri-implant sulcus and on the prosthetic components, but of these, which are exceptional in their in vitro capabilities, very few have been clinically validated, and this represents the real limitation and a great lack of knowledge regarding this topic. Three articles met the inclusion criteria, which were analyzed and compared, to obtain the information necessary for the purposes of the systematic review. Discussion: Extraoral cementation can reduce the excess cement, which, after a normal excess removal procedure, is, nevertheless, of such size that it does not affect the possibility of peri-implant pathologies developing. All these studies concluded that a small amount of cement residue is found in the gingival sulcus, and using eugenol-free oxide cements, the residues were only deposited on the metal surfaces, with a better peri-implant tissues health. Conclusion: Despite the limitations of this study, it was possible to carefully analyze these characteristics and obtain valuable suggestions for daily clinical practice. Resinous cements are considered, due to the free monomers present in them, toxic for the soft tissues. The provisional zinc-oxide cements, also eugenol-free, represent the ideal choice. The different grades of retentive forces provided by these cements do not seem to have clinical effects on the decementation of restorations.

show abstract

Mechanical Behavior and Fracture Loads of Screw‐Retained and Cement‐Retained Lithium Disilicate Implant‐Supported Crowns

Cited by 9 publications

References 31 publications

Fatigue Loading Test on Screw-Retained Lithium Disilicate Crowns Adhesively Cemented on Titanium Abutment

Fatigue Loading Test on Screw-Retained Lithium Disilicate Crowns Adhesively Cemented on Titanium Abutment

‘Role of the modulating factors on the self-perceived OHRQoL of fully dentate subjects and wearers of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported FPDs: A cross-sectional study’

A Systematic Review of Cementation Techniques to Minimize Cement Excess in Cement-Retained Implant Restorations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About