Latif Khalifa Ahmed Abdel, Metwally Nayrouz Adel, Khamis Mohamed Moataz
Postgraduate student, Clinical Master of Oral Implantology Program, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
J Prosthet Dent. 2025 Jan;133(1):215-220. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.01.026. Epub 2023 Feb 20.
Straight preparable abutments provide an alternative to titanium bases (Ti-bases) for single-unit screw-retained implant-supported restorations. However, the debonding force between crowns with a screw access channel cemented to preparable abutments and Ti-bases of different designs and surface treatments is unclear.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the debonding force of screw-retained lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns cemented to straight preparable abutments and Ti-bases of different designs and surface treatments.
Forty laboratory implant analogs (Straumann Bone Level) were embedded into epoxy resin blocks that were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=10 each) according to the abutment type used: CEREC group, Variobase group, airborne-particle abraded Variobase group, and airborne-particle abraded straight preparable abutment group. All specimens were restored with lithium disilicate crowns and cemented with resin cement to the corresponding abutments. They were thermocycled (from 5 to 55 °C for 2000 cycles) followed by cyclic loading (120 000 cycles). The tensile forces required to debond the crowns from the corresponding abutments were measured (N) by using a universal testing machine. The Shapiro-Wilk test of normality was used. Comparison between the study groups was done with 1-way ANOVA (α=.05).
Tensile debonding force values were significantly different according to the type of abutment used (P<.05). The highest retentive force value was recorded in the straight preparable abutment group (928.1 ±222.2 N) followed by the airborne-particle abraded Variobase group (852.6 ±164.6 N), and the CEREC group (498.8 ±136.6 N); the lowest value was reported in the Variobase group (158.6 ±85.2 N).
The retention of screw-retained lithium disilicate implant-supported crowns cemented to airborne-particle abraded straight preparable abutments is significantly higher than to non-surface treated Ti-bases and similar to airborne-particle abraded ones. Abrading abutments with 50-mm AlO significantly increased the debonding force of the lithium disilicate crowns.
对于单单位螺丝固位种植体支持的修复体,直形可预备基台为钛基台提供了一种替代方案。然而,粘结有螺丝通道的全冠与不同设计和表面处理的钛基台之间的脱粘力尚不清楚。
本体外研究的目的是比较粘结在直形可预备基台和不同设计及表面处理的钛基台上的螺丝固位二硅酸锂种植体支持全冠的脱粘力。
将40个实验室种植体模拟物(Straumann骨水平型)嵌入环氧树脂块中,根据使用的基台类型随机分为4组(每组n = 10):CEREC组、Variobase组、空气颗粒研磨的Variobase组和空气颗粒研磨的直形可预备基台组。所有标本均用二硅酸锂全冠修复,并用树脂粘结剂粘结到相应的基台上。进行热循环(从5至55°C循环2000次),然后进行循环加载(120000次循环)。使用万能试验机测量使全冠与相应基台脱粘所需的拉力(N)。采用Shapiro-Wilk正态性检验。研究组之间的比较采用单因素方差分析(α = 0.05)。
根据使用的基台类型,拉伸脱粘力值有显著差异(P < 0.05)。直形可预备基台组记录到最高的固位力值(928.1±222.2 N),其次是空气颗粒研磨的Variobase组(852.6±164.6 N)和CEREC组(498.8±136.6 N);Variobase组记录到最低值(158.6±85.2 N)。
粘结在空气颗粒研磨的直形可预备基台上的螺丝固位二硅酸锂种植体支持全冠的固位力显著高于未进行表面处理的钛基台,且与空气颗粒研磨的钛基台相似。用50μm的Al₂O₃研磨基台显著增加了二硅酸锂全冠的脱粘力。