
doi: 10.1111/cid.12850
pmid: 31692215
AbstractBackgroundDespite the wide use of implants in dentistry, there is insufficient information about the ideal cement for retention.PurposeTo determine the cement bond strength and marginal leakage of crown and partial denture cemented to implant abutments by four different types of cement.Materials and MethodsEighty‐four direct abutments were divided into eight groups (n = 7). Fifty‐six crown and bridge restorations were cemented using zinc phosphate (ZM), temporary cement (TM), resin‐modified glass‐ionomer cement (GM), and self‐adhesive resin cement (RM). After cementation, thermal cycling and incubation in basic fuchsin dye was applied. The maximum load to failure, marginal leakage, and fracture modes were evaluated.ResultsThe mean of retention strength for the bridges (874 N) was higher than the crown samples (705 N) (P = .005). The mean of retention strength for each cement group was ZM = 1298, RM = 1027, GM = 646, and TM = 187 N (P ≤ .0001). Marginal leakage was recorded in majority of the samples; the highest incidence was detected for ZM samples. The cement fracture was mostly adhesive in nature.ConclusionSelf‐adhesive resin and resin‐modified glass ionomer cement had better mechanical properties to retain implant supported restorations.
Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Retention, Crowns, Surface Properties, Materials Testing, Dental Cements, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Cementation, Resin Cements
Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Retention, Crowns, Surface Properties, Materials Testing, Dental Cements, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Cementation, Resin Cements
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 10 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
