Abstract
Cemented implant-supported restorations (CISR) are routinely used implant retained restorations. The greatest disadvantage of CISR is lack of reliable means of retaining and then retrieving the superstructure for routine care and maintenance. But the selection of method of the crown retention presents clinician with a treatment challenge that involves recognition of the drivers of the desired treatment option. Regarding this aspect, the type of cement is a relevant and decisive factor for retention. The dental cements used for cementing implant-supported prostheses may present different effects when compared with those used on teeth. In considering implant abutment-retained crowns, the ideal cement should be strong enough to retain the crown indefinitely, yet weak enough to allow the clinician to retrieve it if necessary.
Key words: Implant restorations, Cement retention
ÖZET
Siman tutuculu implant destekli (STİD) protezler , implant destekli restorasyonlarda rutin olarak kullanılmaktadır. STİD protezlerin en büyük dezavantajları arasında bu protezlerin simante edilmesinden dolayı rutin bakımının yapılamaması gelmektedir. Fakat kron retansiyon metodunun seçimi ile klinisyenler istedikleri tedavi opsiyonuna sahip olabilirler. Bunun içinde, STİD protezlerde kullanılan yapıştırma simanlarının seçimi önemlidir. STİD protezlerde kullanılan simanlar doğal diş restorasyonlarında kullanılan simanlarla aynı özellikte olmalarına rağmen implant restorasyonlarına uygulandıklarına farklılık gösterirler. STİD protezlerde kullanılan simanlar, yeterli tutuculuğa sahip olmalı bununla birlikte implant kontrolünde de hekime restorasyonların rahat çıkarabilme imkanı sağlamalıdırlar.
Anahtar kelimeler: İmplant restorasyonlar, Siman tutuculuğu
Keywords
References
- Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw- retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:719-728.
- Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:793-798.
- Chee W, Felton DA, Johnson PF, Sullivan DY. Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: Which is better? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:137–
- Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Cemented versus screw- retained implant-supported single- tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:260-265.
- Chan DCN, Wilson AH, Barbe P, Cronin RJ , Chung C, Chung K. Effect of preparation convergence on retention and seating discrepancy of complete veneer crowns. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:58–64.[CrossRef]
- Randi AP, Hsu A Verga A, Kim JJ. Dimensional accuracy and retentive strength of a retrievable cement- retained prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:547–556. supported
- Sheets JL,Wilcox C, Wilwerding TJ. Cement selection for cement-retained crown implants. J Prosthodont 2008;17:92- [CrossRef] with dental
- Dudley JE, Richards LC, Abbott JR. Retention of cast crown copings cemented to implant abutments. Aust Dent J 2008;53:332–339.[CrossRef]
- Imbery TA, Burgess JO, Naylor WP. Tensile strength of three cements following treatments. ;5:59-67. alloy J Prosthodont Kent DK, Koka S, Froeschle ML. Retention of cemented implant- supported restorations. J Prosthodont ;6:193–196.[CrossRef] Oilo G, Jorgensen KD. The influence of surface roughness on the retentive ability of two dental luting cements. J Oral Rehabil 1978;5:377-389. CrossRef]
- Uludamar A, Leung T. Inaccurate fit of implant superstructures. Part II: Efficacy of the Preci-Disc system for the correction of errors. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:16–20.
- Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Bogacki MT, Tietge JD. Use of luting agents with an implant system: part I. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:737-741. CrossRef]
- Singer A, Serfaty V. Cement- retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures:a 6-month to 3-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:645-649.
- Felton DA, Kanoy BE, White JT. Recementation of dental castings with zinc phosphate cement: effect on cement bond strength. J Prosthet Dent1987;58:579-583.[CrossRef]
- Gorodovsky S, Zidan O. Retentive strength, disintegration, and marginal quality of luting cements. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:269-274.[CrossRef] Kerby RE, McGlumphy Some Holloway properties of implant abutment luting cements. ;5:321-325.
- Ramp MH, Dixon DL, Ramp LC, Breeding LC, Barber LL. Tensile bond strengths of provisional luting agents used with an implant system. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:510-514. Alfaro MA, Papazoglou E, JE. McGlumphy
- Short-term retention properties of cements for retrievable implant- supported Prosthodont Restor Dent 2004;12:33- Eur J
- Clayton GH, Driscoll CF, Hondrum SO. The effect of cements on the retention of the CeraOne implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:660-665.
- Bresciano M, Schierano G, Manzella C, Screti A, Bignardi C, Preti G. Retention of cements on implant abutments of different height and taper. Clin Oral Implants Res ;16:594-598. Carter GM, Hunter KM, Herbison P. Factors influencing the retention of cemented implant supported crowns. NZ Dent J 1997;93:36-38.
- Akashia AE, Franciscone CE, Tokutsune E, da Silva W Jr. Effects of different types of temporary cements on the tensile strength and marginal adaptation of crowns on implants. J Adhes Dent 2002;4:309
- Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. J Clin Oral Implants Res. ;13:343-348.[CrossRef] Akca K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli MC. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant- supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:536
- GaRey DJ, Tjan AHL, James RA, Caputo AA. Effects of thermal cycling, load cycling, and blood contamination on cemented implant abutments. ;71:124-132. Dent Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:793-798.
- Diaz-Arnold AM, Vargas MA, Haselton DR. Current status of cements for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:135-141.
- Koyano E, Iwaku M, Fusayama T. Pressuring techniques and cement thickness for cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1978;40:544-548.
- Silva EG, Moraes JV, Araşjo MAM, Ushiwata O. A comparative in vitro study of the effect of thermocycling on the tensile bond strength of metal copings cemented over human teeth using two different luting agents. Rev Odontol UNESP 1998;27:537
- Bernal G, Okamura M, Muñoz CA. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont CrossRef] Binon PP. Implants and components: Entering the new millennium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; :76–94.
- Abreu A, Loza MA, Elias A, Mukhopadhyay Rueggeberg FA. Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments. J Prosthet Dent ;101:107-118.[CrossRef] Hibino Y. Influence of types and surface treatment of dental alloy and film thickness of cements on bond strength of dental luting cements. Shika Zairyo Kika 1990;9:786-805.
- Amina A. Zaki, Mohamed L. Zamzam, and Jylan F. El Guindy retention of noble and base metal crowns: total-etch versus self– adhesive luting systems. Egypt Dent Assoc 2007;53:3019-3020.
- Heintze SD, Crown pull-off test (crown retention test) to evaluate the bonding effectiveness of luting agents Dent Mater 2010;26:193-206. CrossRef]
Abstract
References
- Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw- retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:719-728.
- Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:793-798.
- Chee W, Felton DA, Johnson PF, Sullivan DY. Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: Which is better? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:137–
- Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Cemented versus screw- retained implant-supported single- tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:260-265.
- Chan DCN, Wilson AH, Barbe P, Cronin RJ , Chung C, Chung K. Effect of preparation convergence on retention and seating discrepancy of complete veneer crowns. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:58–64.[CrossRef]
- Randi AP, Hsu A Verga A, Kim JJ. Dimensional accuracy and retentive strength of a retrievable cement- retained prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:547–556. supported
- Sheets JL,Wilcox C, Wilwerding TJ. Cement selection for cement-retained crown implants. J Prosthodont 2008;17:92- [CrossRef] with dental
- Dudley JE, Richards LC, Abbott JR. Retention of cast crown copings cemented to implant abutments. Aust Dent J 2008;53:332–339.[CrossRef]
- Imbery TA, Burgess JO, Naylor WP. Tensile strength of three cements following treatments. ;5:59-67. alloy J Prosthodont Kent DK, Koka S, Froeschle ML. Retention of cemented implant- supported restorations. J Prosthodont ;6:193–196.[CrossRef] Oilo G, Jorgensen KD. The influence of surface roughness on the retentive ability of two dental luting cements. J Oral Rehabil 1978;5:377-389. CrossRef]
- Uludamar A, Leung T. Inaccurate fit of implant superstructures. Part II: Efficacy of the Preci-Disc system for the correction of errors. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:16–20.
- Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Bogacki MT, Tietge JD. Use of luting agents with an implant system: part I. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:737-741. CrossRef]
- Singer A, Serfaty V. Cement- retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures:a 6-month to 3-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:645-649.
- Felton DA, Kanoy BE, White JT. Recementation of dental castings with zinc phosphate cement: effect on cement bond strength. J Prosthet Dent1987;58:579-583.[CrossRef]
- Gorodovsky S, Zidan O. Retentive strength, disintegration, and marginal quality of luting cements. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:269-274.[CrossRef] Kerby RE, McGlumphy Some Holloway properties of implant abutment luting cements. ;5:321-325.
- Ramp MH, Dixon DL, Ramp LC, Breeding LC, Barber LL. Tensile bond strengths of provisional luting agents used with an implant system. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:510-514. Alfaro MA, Papazoglou E, JE. McGlumphy
- Short-term retention properties of cements for retrievable implant- supported Prosthodont Restor Dent 2004;12:33- Eur J
- Clayton GH, Driscoll CF, Hondrum SO. The effect of cements on the retention of the CeraOne implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:660-665.
- Bresciano M, Schierano G, Manzella C, Screti A, Bignardi C, Preti G. Retention of cements on implant abutments of different height and taper. Clin Oral Implants Res ;16:594-598. Carter GM, Hunter KM, Herbison P. Factors influencing the retention of cemented implant supported crowns. NZ Dent J 1997;93:36-38.
- Akashia AE, Franciscone CE, Tokutsune E, da Silva W Jr. Effects of different types of temporary cements on the tensile strength and marginal adaptation of crowns on implants. J Adhes Dent 2002;4:309
- Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. J Clin Oral Implants Res. ;13:343-348.[CrossRef] Akca K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli MC. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant- supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:536
- GaRey DJ, Tjan AHL, James RA, Caputo AA. Effects of thermal cycling, load cycling, and blood contamination on cemented implant abutments. ;71:124-132. Dent Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:793-798.
- Diaz-Arnold AM, Vargas MA, Haselton DR. Current status of cements for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:135-141.
- Koyano E, Iwaku M, Fusayama T. Pressuring techniques and cement thickness for cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1978;40:544-548.
- Silva EG, Moraes JV, Araşjo MAM, Ushiwata O. A comparative in vitro study of the effect of thermocycling on the tensile bond strength of metal copings cemented over human teeth using two different luting agents. Rev Odontol UNESP 1998;27:537
- Bernal G, Okamura M, Muñoz CA. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont CrossRef] Binon PP. Implants and components: Entering the new millennium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; :76–94.
- Abreu A, Loza MA, Elias A, Mukhopadhyay Rueggeberg FA. Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments. J Prosthet Dent ;101:107-118.[CrossRef] Hibino Y. Influence of types and surface treatment of dental alloy and film thickness of cements on bond strength of dental luting cements. Shika Zairyo Kika 1990;9:786-805.
- Amina A. Zaki, Mohamed L. Zamzam, and Jylan F. El Guindy retention of noble and base metal crowns: total-etch versus self– adhesive luting systems. Egypt Dent Assoc 2007;53:3019-3020.
- Heintze SD, Crown pull-off test (crown retention test) to evaluate the bonding effectiveness of luting agents Dent Mater 2010;26:193-206. CrossRef]
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal Section | Review |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | April 19, 2012 |
| Submission Date | March 2, 2011 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2012Volume: 15 Issue: 2 |
Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.
CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.
Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)
IMPORTANT NOTICE
All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.
Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.