Porcelain-fused-to-metal surface oxidation effects on cemented casting retention

The effect of fatigue damage on the force required to remove a restoration in a cement-retained implant system

PURPOSE

To evaluate the luting agents and retentive forces before and after mechanical stressing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sample size N was 12 for each group, and 12 Cera-One closed-end gold cylinders were cemented with three types of luting cements (ImProv, UltraTemp, and TempBond). The force required to remove the gold cylinders from the abutments was determined with an MTS testing machine. After cleaning and recementing the cylinders, the samples were placed in the housings of an Alabama-type three-body wear machine and load of 110 N was applied to the gold cylinders at a frequency of 80 cycles/min for 50,000 cycles. Then each cylinder was pulled from its abutment and the force at which the failure occurred was recorded. The procedure was repeated with 300,000 cycles.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis arising from two-way ANOVA found that the forces required to remove the abutments were significantly different. The most retentive cement was ImProv. Before cyclic loading, on average, ImProv produced a retentive value 85% higher than that yielded by TempBond, and 25% higher than that of UltraTemp. The three cements were significantly different at each of the three cycle levels.

CONCLUSIONS

These results might suggest TempBond luting agent as the material of choice for provisional cementation because it allows easier removal of the prosthesis and maintains enough retention to prevent loosening of the restoration. The clinical implication is that the effect of cyclic load on the strength of the cements is different, an important factor in selection of a cement. ImProv had the highest retentive value before and after the two cycles, and TempBond had the lowest. UltraTemp had the highest percentage of retentive value lost. TempBond had no significant loss under loading even though initially it was the weakest.

Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to test the retention of metal copings fabricated to fit on the one-groove, one flat-sided solid titanium abutment using six different cements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten hollow screw 3.8 mm ITI implants were mounted in acrylic resin blocks. A solid titanium abutment was placed on each implant and torqued at 35 Ncm. Prefabricated burn-out caps were placed on the titanium abutment and wax loops added to the occlusal surface to allow for subsequent retention testing. All plastic caps were embedded in phosphate-bonded investment and cast with noble alloy. Castings were inspected for surface irregularities using a stereomicroscope at 10x magnification. The six cements were: 1) eugenol-free zinc oxide (Temp Bond NE); 2) zinc-oxide eugenol (IRM); 3) zinc phosphate (Hy-Bond); 4) resin-modified glass ionomer (Protec Cem); 5) zinc polycarboxylate (Durelon) and 6) 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate resin (Panavia 21). After cementation, implant-abutment-casting assemblies were stored for 24 h in 100% humidity. Samples were subjected to a pull-out test using an Instron universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The load required to de-cement each coping was recorded and mean values for each group calculated. Means and standard deviations of loads at failure were analyzed using ANOVA and a Tukey studentized test. Statistical significance was set at P < or = 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean values (+/- SD) of loads in kilograms at failure (n = 10) for the various cements were as follows: Temp Bond 3.18 (+/- 1.1) (Tukey group D), IRM 9.25 (+/- 3.83) (Tukey group CD), HY-Bond 10.9 (+/- 6.52) (Tukey group C), Protec Cem 18.98 (+/- 6.23) (Tukey group B), Durelon 23.55 (+/- 4.29) (Tukey group B) and Panavia 21, 36.53 (+/- 8.1) (Tukey group A). Means with the same letter in the Tukey grouping are not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

The retention values of castings cemented to ITI solid abutments have not been reported in the literature. Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the results do not suggest that one cement type is better than another, but they do provide a ranking order of the cements in their ability to retain the castings. This ranking is somehow different than that obtained when the same cements are used on natural teeth. The material and surface characteristics of the implant abutment are likely responsible for this difference. Cement retention values obtained from studies that use teeth as abutments may be misleading when used in cement-retained implant-supported crowns. It is at the clinician's discretion to use a certain type of cement, based on the situation at hand.

Tensile bond strengths of provisional luting agents used with an implant system

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Retrievability of cemented implant-supported fixed prostheses is desirable. Retentive strengths of new provisional luting agents have not been reported.

PURPOSE

This study compared the tensile bond strengths of 6 provisional luting agents when used with cemented superstructures and 1 implant system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten castings were fabricated and randomly paired with abutment specimens. Castings were cemented and the assemblies were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 48 hours. Tensile bond strength necessary to remove each casting was measured with a 500-kg load and a crosshead speed of 0.5 cm/min. Crown/abutment specimens were cleaned after testing, and the testing procedure was repeated for a total of 6 luting agents (n = 10). Data were analyzed with 1-way analysis of variance and Scheffé's analysis (alpha=.05).

RESULTS

Tensile bond strengths ranged between 1.29 and 4.08 MPa. The lowest tensile bond strengths were found to be statistically similar between Temp Bond and Provilink luting agents. Neo-Temp luting agent exhibited the highest tensile bond strength (P <.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Temp Bond and Provilink luting agents exhibited the lowest mean tensile bond strengths. Neo-Temp luting agent exhibited a tensile bond strength more than 3 times that of Temp Bond luting agent.