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.


Device used to apply load on coping during cementation
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 5: Device used to apply load on coping during cementation

Mentions: Both Groups A and B were randomly divided into four groups each comprising specimens Groups 1-4. Zirconia copings in Groups A1 and B1 were cemented with glass ionomer (GC gold label luting and lining cement) cement, Groups A2 and B2 were cemented with resin cement (Calibra-Densply), Groups A3 and B3 were cemented with zinc oxide noneugenol cement (Rely X™ Temp NE), and Groups A4 and B4 were cemented with zinc phosphate cement (Harvard Cement). Each coping of all groups was sandblasted with 50 μm aluminum oxide before cementation. Cements were mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions and were applied in a thin layer to the inner axial walls of the crown. Each coping was seated on its perspective abutment with firm finger pressure and then placed under a 10 kg weight for 5 min and cementation was carried out [Figure 5]. Excess cement was removed with an explorer.


Assessment and comparison of retention of zirconia copings luted with different cements onto zirconia and titanium abutments: An in vitro study
Device used to apply load on coping during cementation
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 5: Device used to apply load on coping during cementation
Mentions: Both Groups A and B were randomly divided into four groups each comprising specimens Groups 1-4. Zirconia copings in Groups A1 and B1 were cemented with glass ionomer (GC gold label luting and lining cement) cement, Groups A2 and B2 were cemented with resin cement (Calibra-Densply), Groups A3 and B3 were cemented with zinc oxide noneugenol cement (Rely X™ Temp NE), and Groups A4 and B4 were cemented with zinc phosphate cement (Harvard Cement). Each coping of all groups was sandblasted with 50 μm aluminum oxide before cementation. Cements were mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions and were applied in a thin layer to the inner axial walls of the crown. Each coping was seated on its perspective abutment with firm finger pressure and then placed under a 10 kg weight for 5 min and cementation was carried out [Figure 5]. Excess cement was removed with an explorer.

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.