Marginal Fit and Retention Strength of Zirconia Crowns Cemented by Self-adhesive Resin Cements

The absolute marginal gap (AMG) precementation and postcementation and the retention of zirconia crowns cemented to standardized molar preparations (4×10) by self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) were evaluated. The following SARCs were used: RelyX U-200 (RXU200; 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany), SmartCem 2 (SC2; Dentsply, Milford, DE, USA), and G-Cem Automix (GCA; GC, Alsip, IL, USA). The control adhesive resin cement was Panavia 21 (PAN; Kuraray Dental Co Ltd, Osaka, Japan). Twenty measuring locations at a constant interval along the margins were marked, and the AMG was measured by an image analysis system connected to a stereomicroscope (20×). The cemented copings were aged 270 days at 100% humidity and 37°C and then underwent 10,000 thermal cycles, 5°C-55°C. After aging, the crowns were tested for retention, and the debonded surfaces were examined at 3× magnification. The mean marginal gaps precementation and postcementation were 34.8 ± 17.4 μm and 72.1 ± 31 μm, respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the cements. A significant difference ( p≤0.001) in retention between the cements was found. The highest values were obtained for SC2 and GCA (1385 Pa and 1229 Pa, respectively), but these presented no statistically significant differences. The lowest values were found for PAN and RXU200 (738 Pa and 489 Pa, respectively), but these showed no statistically significant differences. The predominant mode of failure in all of the groups was mixed, and no correlations were found between marginal gap and retention.

[Elastomeric impression materials]

Elastomeric impression materials are in common use. The impression taken should be highly precise, thus, requiring specific care when manipulatingthese materials. There are 4 groups of elastomers; polysulfide, condensation silicone, addition silicone and polyether; each differ in their setting mechanism and their physical and chemical properties. This review elaborates the major properties of elastomers and its implications on their use. The impression material is inserted into the patient's mouth in a viscous state and transforms into viscoelastic state, upon withdrawal, influencing the residual deformation. The requirements are minimal residual deformation or maximal elastic recovery. As the mouth is a wet environment a major consideration is hydrophilicity. The wettability which is estimated by measuring either the contact angle of a droplet of water and the substrate post setting or the contact angle of a droplet of impression material and the wet tooth pre setting, determines the interaction of the material with both mouth fluids and gypsum. As the primary end target is to obtain a model depicting accurately the oral details, an attention to the impressions' compatibility with gypsum should also be given. Many studies were conducted to get a thorough understanding of the hydrophilic properties of each material, and the mechanism utilized, such as surfactants in hydrophilic PVS. Polyether is the only material that is truly hydrophilic; it exhibits the lowest contact angle, during and after setting. Recent studies show that during setting the Polyether hydrophilicity is increased compared to the condition after setting. Dimensional stability, a crucial property of the impression, is affected by the physical and chemical attributes of the material, such as its tear strength. Polysulfide has the highest tear strength. Tear Strength is affected by two major parameters, viscosity, a built-in property, and how fast the impression is pulled out of the mouth, the faster the impression is loaded and pulled out, the higher the tear strength is. The clinical use is dictated from the properties of each impression material, and the understanding of those enables the practitioner to minimize failures.