Técnica de cimentação em próteses sobre implantes com pilares protéticos asperizados: estudo in vitro

Abstract

Igai F. Cementation technique on sandblasted prosthetic implant abutments: an in vitro study [dissertation]. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia; 2014. Versão Original. The Implantology provides treatments with high clinical success rate in screw or cement retained rehabilitations. The high survival rate of the implants, its significant clinical success, and the great predictability led to a paradigm shift in current Implantology. The dental implant, previously used for replacing large teeth losses, is also applied to partial dental losses and even single tooth replacement. Therefore, technical difficulties have decreased even more, which consolidated the use of cement retained implant prosthesis. Thus the retrievability, which is the main resource of screw retained implant prostheses, is not the crucial point in the prosthesis retention selection. However, cement retained prostheses have disadvantages that can lead to treatment failure. One can mention the presence of residual excess cement, which may lead to an inflammation of the peri-implant tissue, or even a possible implant loss. There are in the literature cementation techniques that reduce the luting agent excess. Another studied factor is the influence of the prosthetic abutment surface roughness in the prosthetic element tensile strength. The aim of the study was to analyze the tensile strength of prosthetic crowns cemented on standard machined and sand blasted abutments using an experimental cementation technique. Forty specimens were fabricated and four experimental groups were formed, according to the cementation technique (control technique and experimental technique) and the prosthetic abutment roughness (standard machined and sand blasted). The crowns were cemented with zinc phosphate cement. The tensile strength analysis was performed, after the forty specimens thermal cycling, using an universal testing machine. In the cementation techniques analysis it was observed that there were no statistically significant differences between the groups, with mean tensile strength values of 157.83N±22.16N for the control techniquestandard machined surface and 159.95N±46.40N for the experimental technique-standard machined surface. The data analysis of control technique-sand blasted surface group (626.23 N±34.80N) and experimental technique-sand blasted surface group (642.62 N±94.00N) also indicated no significant differences. In the group analysis, comparing the surface roughness, it was observed significant differences, with values of 157.83N±22.16N for the control technique-standard machined surface group and 626.23N±34.80N for the control technique-sand blasted surface group. The same was observed in the experimental technique-standard machined surface group with 159.95N±46.40N values and 642.62N±94.00N for the experimental technique-sand blasted surface group. It can be concluded that, under the study conditions, the experimental cementation technique showed no significant differences with the control technique, regarding tensi...