Suppr超能文献

体外研究不同暂封材料对氧化锆全瓷冠和钛基台的固位力影响。

Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro.

机构信息

Department of Oral and Plastic Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Halle, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, 06120, Halle, Germany.

Department of Prosthodontics, Carl Gustav Carus Faculty of Medicine, University of Technology, Fetscherstrasse 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.

出版信息

Int J Implant Dent. 2021 Jul 20;7(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40729-021-00349-4.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to examine the retention force of monolithic zirconia copings cemented with various temporary cements on implant abutments in vitro.

METHODS

Sixty exercise implants with pre-screwed implant abutments were embedded in resin. Subsequently, 60 CAD/CAM manufactured zirconia copings were divided into three main groups [Harvard Implant Semi-permanent (HAV), implantlink semi Forte (IMP), Temp Bond NE (TBNE)]. The zirconia copings were cemented on the implant abutments and loaded with 35 N. Specimens were stored in distilled water (37 °C) for 24 h. Half of the test specimens of each group were subjected to a thermocycling (TC) process. Retention force was measured in a universal testing machine. Using magnifying glasses, the fracture mode was determined. Statistical analysis was performed applying the Kruskal-Wallis test, the post hoc test according to Dunn-Bonferroni and a chi-square test of independence.

RESULTS

Without TC, IMP showed the highest retention of the three temporary luting agents (100.5 ± 39.14 N). The measured retention forces of IMP were higher than those of HAV (45.78 ± 15.66 N) and TBNE (61.16 ± 20.19 N). After TC, retention was reduced. IMP showed the greatest retentive strength (21.69 ± 13.61 N, three fail outs). HAV and TBNE showed pull-off forces of similar magnitude (17.38 ± 12.77 N and 16.97 ± 12.36 N, two fail outs). The fracture mode analysis showed different results regarding the tested cements before and after TC (facture type before/after TC): IMP (III+II/III), HAV (I/II) and TBNE (III/III). There were clear differences of the fracture modes regarding the examination before and after TC.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this study, IMP showed the highest pull-off forces under the chosen test conditions. All three temporary luting agents showed lower retention forces after TC. Retention values in the individual cement classes were very heterogeneous. Easy cement removal in the crown lumen favours the dominance of adhesive cement fractures on the abutment and adhesive/cohesive cement fractures on the abutment with HAV appears advantageous in case of recementation of the superstructure.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是体外研究不同临时粘固剂粘结在种植体基台上的整体氧化锆全瓷冠的固位力。

方法

将 60 个带有预旋入种植体基台的种植体植入树脂中。随后,制作 60 个 CAD/CAM 制造的氧化锆全瓷冠,分为三组[哈佛植入体半永久粘固剂(HAV)、implantlink 半福斯特(IMP)、Temp Bond NE(TBNE)]。将氧化锆全瓷冠粘结在种植体基台上,施加 35 N 的载荷。将试件储存在蒸馏水中(37°C)24 小时。每组的一半试件进行热循环(TC)处理。在万能试验机上测量固位力。使用放大镜确定断裂模式。应用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验、Dunn-Bonferroni 事后检验和独立性卡方检验进行统计学分析。

结果

未经 TC 处理时,IMP 三种临时粘固剂中固位力最高(100.5 ± 39.14 N)。IMP 的测量固位力高于 HAV(45.78 ± 15.66 N)和 TBNE(61.16 ± 20.19 N)。TC 后,固位力降低。IMP 显示出最大的固位强度(21.69 ± 13.61 N,三个试件失效)。HAV 和 TBNE 显示出相似的拔出力(17.38 ± 12.77 N 和 16.97 ± 12.36 N,两个试件失效)。断裂模式分析表明,TC 前后三种测试用粘结剂的结果不同(TC 前/后断裂类型):IMP(III+II/III)、HAV(I/II)和 TBNE(III/III)。TC 前后的断裂模式有明显差异。

结论

在本研究范围内,IMP 在所选测试条件下显示出最高的拔出力。所有三种临时粘固剂在 TC 后固位力均降低。个别粘结剂的固位值差异很大。在冠腔中易于去除粘结剂有利于粘结剂在基台上的断裂,而在重新粘结上部结构时,HAV 上的粘结/粘结剂断裂似乎是有利的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a989/8289925/1e5552486b46/40729_2021_349_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro.
Int J Implant Dent. 2021 Jul 20;7(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40729-021-00349-4.
3
Retentive strength of two-piece CAD/CAM zirconia implant abutments.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014 Dec;16(6):920-5. doi: 10.1111/cid.12060. Epub 2013 Mar 25.
6
Retention of zirconia on titanium in two-piece abutments with self-adhesive resin cements.
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Aug;120(2):214-219. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.11.020. Epub 2018 Apr 5.
8
Retentive strength of implant-supported CAD-CAM lithium disilicate crowns on zirconia custom abutments using 6 different cements.
J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Feb;117(2):247-252. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.06.014. Epub 2016 Sep 24.
9
Cement selection for implant-supported crowns fabricated with different luting space settings.
J Prosthodont. 2013 Feb;22(2):112-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00912.x.
10
Retention of zirconia copings on zirconia implant abutments cemented with provisional luting agents.
J Oral Rehabil. 2010 Jan;37(1):48-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02013.x. Epub 2009 Oct 22.

本文引用的文献

1
Effects of abutment height and type of cements on bond strength of monolithic zirconia single crowns luted to one-piece zirconia implants.
Int J Prosthodont. 2022 July/August;35(4):442–452. doi: 10.11607/ijp.7110. Epub 2021 Mar 18.
4
An study to compare the influence of newer luting cements on retention of cement-retained implant-supported prosthesis.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2019 Apr-Jun;19(2):166-172. doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_235_18.
5
Chewing simulation of zirconia implant supported restorations.
J Prosthodont Res. 2019 Jul;63(3):361-367. doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2019.02.002. Epub 2019 Mar 8.
6
Evaluation and comparison of the film thicknesses of six temporary cements before and after thermal cycling.
Niger J Clin Pract. 2018 Dec;21(12):1656-1661. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_382_17.
7
8
Early histological, microbiological, radiological, and clinical response to cemented and screw-retained all-ceramic single crowns.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29(10):996-1006. doi: 10.1111/clr.13366. Epub 2018 Sep 20.
9
Retrievability of implant-supported zirconia restorations cemented on zirconia abutments.
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Nov;120(5):740-746. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.011. Epub 2018 May 25.
10
Effect of cleaning methods on retentive values of saliva-contaminated implant-supported zirconia copings.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 May;29(5):530-536. doi: 10.1111/clr.13150. Epub 2018 Apr 15.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验