Research Associate, Department of Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, Centre for Implantology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Aachen, Germany.
Private Practice, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Nov;120(5):740-746. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.011. Epub 2018 May 25.
Retrievability of implant-supported restorations is important. Data are lacking for cemented zirconia crowns on zirconia abutments.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of different cements and marginal discrepancy on the retrievability of implant-supported zirconia crowns. Furthermore, the influence of thermocycling on retrievability was evaluated.
Thirty tapered Camlog zirconia abutments (6-degree taper, 6×4.3 mm) were used. Thirty zirconia crowns with 3 different marginal cementation discrepancies (70, 130, 190 μm) were fabricated by using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology. Five cements for interim or semidefinitive cementation were used: eugenol-free zinc oxide (Freegenol) and acrylurethane (ImProv) and 3 different composite resin cements (X-Pand Implant, Dyna Implant, Telio CS Cem Implant). Specimens underwent either 3-day storage in sodium chloride or thermocycling (10 000 cycles). Crowns were removed by using a universal testing machine (UTM) and a clinical removal device. Data were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA and the Scheffé test (α=.05).
Thermocycling decreased the retention force significantly (P<.001). Marginal discrepancy (70 to 190 μm) was not significantly influential on retrievability (P>.05). Therefore, groups were pooled according to the factor of marginal discrepancy. The mean retention force using the UTM after 3-day storage and thermocycling was as follows: Freegenol, 235 ±42 N (thermocycling, 29 ±9 N); Improv, 110 ±50 N (thermocycling, 35 ±38 N); Telio CS, 104 ±17 N (thermocycling, 6 ±10 N); Dyna implant, 61 ±17 N (thermocycling, 1 ±1 N); and X-Pand, 50 ±16 N (thermocycling, 2 ±2 N).
Retention forces of the tested cements were significantly different and decreased considerably after thermocycling. Marginal cementation discrepancy between 70 and 190 μm did not influence retrievability.
可摘修复体的可摘性很重要。关于氧化锆基台粘结的氧化锆全瓷冠，目前数据有限。
本体外研究的目的是调查不同粘结剂和边缘间隙对种植体支持的氧化锆全瓷冠可摘性的影响。此外，还评估了热循环对可摘性的影响。
使用 30 个锥形 Camlog 氧化锆基台（6 度锥度，6×4.3mm）。通过计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造（CAD-CAM）技术制作了 30 个具有 3 种不同边缘粘结间隙（70、130、190μm）的氧化锆全瓷冠。使用了 5 种用于临时或半永久性粘结的粘结剂：无丁香油氧化锌（Freegenol）和丙烯尿烷（ImProv）以及 3 种不同的复合树脂粘结剂（X-Pand Implant、Dyna Implant、Telio CS Cem Implant）。试件在氯化钠中储存 3 天或热循环（10000 次循环）。使用万能试验机（UTM）和临床取出装置取出牙冠。使用单向方差分析和谢费检验（α=.05）对数据进行分析。
热循环显著降低了保持力（P<.001）。边缘间隙（70 至 190μm）对可摘性没有显著影响（P>.05）。因此，根据边缘差异的因素，将组进行了合并。3 天储存和热循环后使用 UTM 测量的平均保持力如下：Freegenol，235±42N（热循环，29±9N）；Improv，110±50N（热循环，35±38N）；Telio CS，104±17N（热循环，6±10N）；Dyna implant，61±17N（热循环，1±1N）；X-Pand，50±16N（热循环，2±2N）。
测试粘结剂的保持力差异显著，热循环后显著降低。70 至 190μm 之间的边缘粘结间隙差异不影响可摘性。
