Tensile Strength of Cementing Agents on the CeraOne System of Dental Prosthesis on Implants

Montenegro, Alexandre Campos; Machado, Aldir Nascimento; Gouvêa, Cresus Vinícius Depes de

doi:10.1097/id.0b013e31818c4947

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of present study are contradictory with the study conducted by Montenegro AC et al, in which he compared the retention of glass ionomer, zinc phosphate, zinc oxide eugenol and resin cement and it was found that zinc phosphate had the highest retention among all [9].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Retention of Implant Supported Metal Crowns Cemented with Different Luting Agents: A Comparative Invitro Study

Kapoor¹

2016

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Retention of Implant Supported Metal Crowns Cemented with Different Luting Agents: A Comparative Invitro Study

Kapoor¹

2016

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This may come as some surprise to clinicians in considering the widespread use of glass ionomer cements for the cementation of natural tooth crowns. This finding is consistent with a previous studies that demonstrated that glass ionomer cement showed significantly lower retention than zinc phosphate and resinous cements, and similar retention to zinc oxide cement without eugenol (13,15) .In the present study, no pretreatment was performed on the abutments, and glass ionomer cement does not adhere to an inert surface. Furthermore, the solubility of glass ionomer cement is more than that of other cements, and it is very susceptible to early water contact and desiccation (16) ,which can dramatically reduce the mechanical properties of the cement (17) .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Panavia cement contains a phosphate monomer, 10-methacryloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP) (also present in alloy primer), which facilitates chemical bonding to non-precious metals (1) .In the study of sheets et al, (12) they compared the retentive strengths of different luting agents used to cement base metal alloy copings to implant abutments. Zinc phosphate and resin modified glass ionomer cements showed the same retention strength (12) .With regard to the CeraOne system, zinc phosphate cement had highest retention value, and resinous cement presented statistically similar retentive strength (13) .Squier et al, (14) reported a higher retentive value for Panavia than zinc phosphate and resin modified glass ionomer, which differs from the current study. This discrepancy may be related to sandblasting and surface conditioning in this study.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

Effect of Different Types of Luting Cements on Retention and Marginal Adaptation of Implant-Supported Crowns (An in Vitro Study)

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…23 In particular, water-based cements such as zinc phosphate (ZP), zinc polycarboxylate, and glass ionomer cements have shown a wide variety of retention values. [23][24][25] Some authors have suggested that the use of permanent cements for luting single-unit restorations and provisional cements for luting multiunit implant-supported restorations 26,27 because provisional cements are recommended for restorations that may require intervention, whereas more retentive cements such as resin cement are more appropriate when future retrieval is not necessary. 28,29 There have been some studies on the retention of zirconia copings on titanium abutments, but there is not enough information about the retention of zirconia copings onto zirconia abutments.…”

Section: Dislodgement Resistance Of Zirconia Copings Cemented Onto Zimentioning

confidence: 99%

Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE To determine the effect of the cement type and abutment material on the tensile strength required to dislodge zirconia copings. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two experimental groups of abutments were prepared: (1) titanium abutments (n = 30) and (2) zirconia abutments (n = 30). Sixty zirconia copings (custom designed) were fabricated using 3-dimensional computer-assisted design to have a 6-mm projection above the abutment to accommodate a hole, through which a wire was inserted to attach the zirconia coping to a universal testing machine. Each abutment was placed onto an implant analog embedded in acrylic resin blocks to fit onto the universal testing machine. The zirconia copings were cemented onto the abutments with a provisional luting agent, zinc phosphate (ZP) cement, and adhesive resin cement, and after 5500 thermocycles, a tensile force was applied at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The removal force was recorded for each specimen. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and 1-way ANOVA were used for the statistical analysis (P < 0.05). RESULTS The mean forces necessary to remove the zirconia copings from titanium abutments were 6.52, 83.09, and 251.18 N for temporary cement, ZP cement, and resin cement, respectively. For zirconia abutments, the required forces were 17.82, 116.41, and 248.72 N. CONCLUSIONS The abutment material had no effect on retention, but the cement type affected the retention of the zirconia copings.

show abstract

Tensile Strength of Cementing Agents on the CeraOne System of Dental Prosthesis on Implants

Abstract: The cements differed amongst them as regards tensile strength, with the highest bonding levels recorded with zinc phosphate (Cimento LS) and the lowest with the zinc oxide without eugenol (Rely x Temp NE).

Cited by 15 publications

References 9 publications

Retention of Implant Supported Metal Crowns Cemented with Different Luting Agents: A Comparative Invitro Study

Retention of Implant Supported Metal Crowns Cemented with Different Luting Agents: A Comparative Invitro Study

Effect of Different Types of Luting Cements on Retention and Marginal Adaptation of Implant-Supported Crowns (An in Vitro Study)

Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About