2014臺灣口腔顎面外科學會雜誌Requires access

Retention and Marginal Adaptation of Luting Agents on Dental Implant-Supported Prostheses

Tzu-Hsuan Li, Dai-Min Lin, Yu‐Hwa Pan

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Purpose: Selecting the appropriate luting agent is critical to the long-tem efficacy of cement-retained implant prostheses, in part because some luting agents may prevent retrieval of prostheses for future maintenance. At the same time, a strong marginal seal will prevent marginal leakage that can result in toxin formation and inflammation around implant fixtures. The present study evaluated the seal strength and marginal leakage of 7 different luting agents used with implant abutment/analog assemblies. Materials and methods: Of the agents tested, two were definitive and five were provi-sional cements. The definitive cements were Maxcem resin cement and zinc phosphate cement. The provisional cements included three zinc-oxide eugenol and noneugenol cements (namely, Opotow, Temp Bond and Temp Bond Noneugenol), one acrylic/urethane-based cement (ImProv), and one resin-based cement (premier). Thirty-five Steri-Oss implant abutment/analog assemblies and cast superstructures were used to test these seven cements (five per cement). Following cementation of the superstructures onto the implant abutments, each specimen was subjected to 1,000 cycles on a thermocycling machine (0˚C-55˚C) and 100,000 cycles on a chewing machine (75N). The cement failure stress and marginal leakage were tested for each specimen. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOV A, Duncan's Multiple Range Analysis and Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The cement failure stress mean of the Maxcem resin cement was significantly higher than that of the other cements (P<.0001), and the mean marginal leakage scores for ImProv, Optow, and Premier were significantly lower than those of the other cements (p =.005). Conclusions: The definitive cements exhibited much stronger retention than the provisional cements. However, there were no significant differences in retentive properties among the five provisional cements themselves. As for marginal leakage, ImProv and Premier showed the least marginal leakage, while Temp Bond and Temp Bond Noneugenol had the highest leakage among the luting agents tested.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Purpose: Selecting the appropriate luting agent is critical to the long-tem efficacy of cement-retained implant prostheses, in part because some luting agents may prevent retrieval of prostheses for future maintenance. At the same time, a strong marginal seal will prevent marginal leakage that can result in toxin formation and inflammation around implant fixtures. The present study evaluated the seal strength and marginal leakage of 7 different luting agents used with implant abutment/analog assemblies. Materials and methods: Of the agents tested, two were definitive and five were provi-sional cements. The definitive cements were Maxcem resin cement and zinc phosphate cement. The provisional cements included three zinc-oxide eugenol and noneugenol cements (namely, Opotow, Temp Bond and Temp Bond Noneugenol), one acrylic/urethane-based cement (ImProv), and one resin-based cement (premier). Thirty-five Steri-Oss implant abutment/analog assemblies and cast superstructures were used to test these seven cements (five per cement). Following cementation of the superstructures onto the implant abutments, each specimen was subjected to 1,000 cycles on a thermocycling machine (0˚C-55˚C) and 100,000 cycles on a chewing machine (75N). The cement failure stress and marginal leakage were tested for each specimen. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOV A, Duncan's Multiple Range Analysis and Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The cement failure stress mean of the Maxcem resin cement was significantly higher than that of the other cements (P<.0001), and the mean marginal leakage scores for ImProv, Optow, and Premier were significantly lower than those of the other cements (p =.005). Conclusions: The definitive cements exhibited much stronger retention than the provisional cements. However, there were no significant differences in retentive properties among the five provisional cements themselves. As for marginal leakage, ImProv and Premier showed the least marginal leakage, while Temp Bond and Temp Bond Noneugenol had the highest leakage among the luting agents tested.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Purpose: Selecting the appropriate luting agent is critical to the long-tem efficacy of cement-retained implant prostheses, in part because some luting agents may prevent retrieval of prostheses for future maintenance. At the same time, a strong marginal seal will prevent marginal leakage that can result in toxin formation and inflammation around implant fixtures. The present study evaluated the seal strength and marginal leakage of 7 different luting agents used with implant abutment/analog assemblies. Materials and methods: Of the agents tested, two were definitive and five were provi-sional cements. The definitive cements were Maxcem resin cement and zinc phosphate cement. The provisional cements included three zinc-oxide eugenol and noneugenol cements (namely, Opotow, Temp Bond and Temp Bond Noneugenol), one acrylic/urethane-based cement (ImProv), and one resin-based cement (premier). Thirty-five Steri-Oss implant abutment/analog assemblies and cast superstructures were used to test these seven cements (five per cement). Following cementation of the superstructures onto the implant abutments, each specimen was subjected to 1,000 cycles on a thermocycling machine (0˚C-55˚C) and 100,000 cycles on a chewing machine (75N). The cement failure stress and marginal leakage were tested for each specimen. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOV A, Duncan's Multiple Range Analysis and Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The cement failure stress mean of the Maxcem resin cement was significantly higher than that of the other cements (P<.0001), and the mean marginal leakage scores for ImProv, Optow, and Premier were significantly lower than those of the other cements (p =.005). Conclusions: The definitive cements exhibited much stronger retention than the provisional cements. However, there were no significant differences in retentive properties among the five provisional cements themselves. As for marginal leakage, ImProv and Premier showed the least marginal leakage, while Temp Bond and Temp Bond Noneugenol had the highest leakage among the luting agents tested.

Key concepts: Cement, Luting agent, Materials science, Abutment, Dentistry, Implant, Dental cement, Cementation (geology)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Retention and Marginal Adaptation of Luting Agents on Dental Implant-Supported Prostheses — Research Paper | ScholarLens