Limits...
Assessment and comparison of retention of zirconia copings luted with different cements onto zirconia and titanium abutments: An in vitro study

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Aim:: The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess and compare the retention of zirconia copings luted with different luting agents onto zirconia and titanium abutments.

Materials and methods:: Titanium and zirconia abutments were torqued at 35 N/cm onto implant analogs. The samples were divided into two groups: Group A consisted of four titanium abutments and 32 zirconia copings and Group B consisted of four zirconia abutments and 32 zirconia copings and four luting agents were used. The cemented copings were subjected to tensile dislodgement forces and subjected to ANOVA test.

Results:: Zirconia abutments recorded a higher mean force compared to titanium. Among the luting agents, resin cement recorded the highest mean force followed by zinc phosphate, glass ionomer, and noneugenol zinc oxide cement, respectively.

Conclusion:: Highest mean retention was recorded for zirconia implant abutments compared to titanium abutments when luted with zirconia copings.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Group B consisting of four zirconia abutments and 32 zirconia copings
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837784&req=5

Figure 4: Group B consisting of four zirconia abutments and 32 zirconia copings

Mentions: Materials used in the present study included eight implant analogs (Collagen Meniscus Implant [CMI]), four titanium [Figure 1] abutments (CMI, hexed abutment), four zirconia abutments [Figure 2], and 64 zirconia copings (Lava, Zirconia 3M ESPE) [Figures 3 and 4]. The luting agents used were resin cement (Calibra-Densply), glass ionomer (GC gold label luting and lining cement), zinc phosphate (Harvard Cement), and zinc oxide noneugenol (Rely X™ Temp NE) cements.


Assessment and comparison of retention of zirconia copings luted with different cements onto zirconia and titanium abutments: An in vitro study
Group B consisting of four zirconia abutments and 32 zirconia copings
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837784&req=5

Figure 4: Group B consisting of four zirconia abutments and 32 zirconia copings
Mentions: Materials used in the present study included eight implant analogs (Collagen Meniscus Implant [CMI]), four titanium [Figure 1] abutments (CMI, hexed abutment), four zirconia abutments [Figure 2], and 64 zirconia copings (Lava, Zirconia 3M ESPE) [Figures 3 and 4]. The luting agents used were resin cement (Calibra-Densply), glass ionomer (GC gold label luting and lining cement), zinc phosphate (Harvard Cement), and zinc oxide noneugenol (Rely X™ Temp NE) cements.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Aim:: The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess and compare the retention of zirconia copings luted with different luting agents onto zirconia and titanium abutments.

Materials and methods:: Titanium and zirconia abutments were torqued at 35 N/cm onto implant analogs. The samples were divided into two groups: Group A consisted of four titanium abutments and 32 zirconia copings and Group B consisted of four zirconia abutments and 32 zirconia copings and four luting agents were used. The cemented copings were subjected to tensile dislodgement forces and subjected to ANOVA test.

Results:: Zirconia abutments recorded a higher mean force compared to titanium. Among the luting agents, resin cement recorded the highest mean force followed by zinc phosphate, glass ionomer, and noneugenol zinc oxide cement, respectively.

Conclusion:: Highest mean retention was recorded for zirconia implant abutments compared to titanium abutments when luted with zirconia copings.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus