The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments

Adolfo Coelho de Oliveira Lopes, Camila Moreira Machado, Leonardo Rigoldi Bonjardim, Edmara Tatiely Pedroso Bergamo, Ilana Santos Ramalho, Lukasz Witek, Paulo Coelho, Estevam Augusto Bonfante

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the pullout resistance of CAD/CAM implant-supported crowns cemented with provisional and definitive cements on Ti-base implant abutments. Materials and Methods: Sixty crowns were milled for use in Ti-base implant abutments and divided (n = 15/group) according to material, as follows: (a) [Pr] Temporary acrylic resin; (b) [Co-Cr] Cobalt-Chromium alloy; (c) [Zr] polycrystalline zirconia; and (d) [Ti] titanium. The cementation was performed with RelyX Temp NE (RxT) cement or RelyX U200 self-etching resin cement, under a 50 N (5 kg) load for 10 minutes. Twenty-four hours after cementation, the crowns were subjected to the pullout test in a universal test machine, at a 1.0 mm/min crosshead speed. The tests were performed first without cement to evaluate frictional resistance (Baseline), then with provisional cement (RelyX Temp NE without cement again (Baseline After RxT), and finally with resin cement (U200). The results were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey test (p < 0.05). Results: Data evaluation as a function of cement type demonstrated the superiority of resin-based cements relative to provisional and baseline groups (p < 0.01). While Co-Cr crowns presented the highest pullout strength values, Pr showed the lowest values (data collapsed over cement) (p < 0.001). Retentiveness data as a function of both factors demonstrated similar pullout resistance between groups without cement (p < 0.001), except Zr baseline. Also, Co-Cr presented higher pullout strength compared to other materials. Conclusions: Self-adhesive resin cement exhibited superior retention compared to temporary cement, regardless of crown material. Co-Cr and titanium presented higher levels of retention to Ti-base abutment after being cemented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Prosthodontics
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Computer-Aided Design
Resin Cements
Crowns
Cementation
Titanium
Chromium Alloys
Acrylic Resins
Analysis of Variance

Keywords

  • Abutment design
  • CAD/CAM
  • Dental cements
  • Dental implants
  • Dental materials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Lopes, A. C. D. O., Machado, C. M., Bonjardim, L. R., Bergamo, E. T. P., Ramalho, I. S., Witek, L., ... Bonfante, E. A. (Accepted/In press). The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments. Journal of Prosthodontics. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12927

The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments. / Lopes, Adolfo Coelho de Oliveira; Machado, Camila Moreira; Bonjardim, Leonardo Rigoldi; Bergamo, Edmara Tatiely Pedroso; Ramalho, Ilana Santos; Witek, Lukasz; Coelho, Paulo; Bonfante, Estevam Augusto.

In: Journal of Prosthodontics, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lopes, Adolfo Coelho de Oliveira ; Machado, Camila Moreira ; Bonjardim, Leonardo Rigoldi ; Bergamo, Edmara Tatiely Pedroso ; Ramalho, Ilana Santos ; Witek, Lukasz ; Coelho, Paulo ; Bonfante, Estevam Augusto. / The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments. In: Journal of Prosthodontics. 2018.
@article{3b8677708ccb4d278e23d557314a9787,
title = "The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate the pullout resistance of CAD/CAM implant-supported crowns cemented with provisional and definitive cements on Ti-base implant abutments. Materials and Methods: Sixty crowns were milled for use in Ti-base implant abutments and divided (n = 15/group) according to material, as follows: (a) [Pr] Temporary acrylic resin; (b) [Co-Cr] Cobalt-Chromium alloy; (c) [Zr] polycrystalline zirconia; and (d) [Ti] titanium. The cementation was performed with RelyX Temp NE (RxT) cement or RelyX U200 self-etching resin cement, under a 50 N (5 kg) load for 10 minutes. Twenty-four hours after cementation, the crowns were subjected to the pullout test in a universal test machine, at a 1.0 mm/min crosshead speed. The tests were performed first without cement to evaluate frictional resistance (Baseline), then with provisional cement (RelyX Temp NE without cement again (Baseline After RxT), and finally with resin cement (U200). The results were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey test (p < 0.05). Results: Data evaluation as a function of cement type demonstrated the superiority of resin-based cements relative to provisional and baseline groups (p < 0.01). While Co-Cr crowns presented the highest pullout strength values, Pr showed the lowest values (data collapsed over cement) (p < 0.001). Retentiveness data as a function of both factors demonstrated similar pullout resistance between groups without cement (p < 0.001), except Zr baseline. Also, Co-Cr presented higher pullout strength compared to other materials. Conclusions: Self-adhesive resin cement exhibited superior retention compared to temporary cement, regardless of crown material. Co-Cr and titanium presented higher levels of retention to Ti-base abutment after being cemented.",
keywords = "Abutment design, CAD/CAM, Dental cements, Dental implants, Dental materials",
author = "Lopes, {Adolfo Coelho de Oliveira} and Machado, {Camila Moreira} and Bonjardim, {Leonardo Rigoldi} and Bergamo, {Edmara Tatiely Pedroso} and Ramalho, {Ilana Santos} and Lukasz Witek and Paulo Coelho and Bonfante, {Estevam Augusto}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jopr.12927",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Prosthodontics",
issn = "1059-941X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Effect of CAD/CAM Crown Material and Cement Type on Retention to Implant Abutments

AU - Lopes, Adolfo Coelho de Oliveira

AU - Machado, Camila Moreira

AU - Bonjardim, Leonardo Rigoldi

AU - Bergamo, Edmara Tatiely Pedroso

AU - Ramalho, Ilana Santos

AU - Witek, Lukasz

AU - Coelho, Paulo

AU - Bonfante, Estevam Augusto

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the pullout resistance of CAD/CAM implant-supported crowns cemented with provisional and definitive cements on Ti-base implant abutments. Materials and Methods: Sixty crowns were milled for use in Ti-base implant abutments and divided (n = 15/group) according to material, as follows: (a) [Pr] Temporary acrylic resin; (b) [Co-Cr] Cobalt-Chromium alloy; (c) [Zr] polycrystalline zirconia; and (d) [Ti] titanium. The cementation was performed with RelyX Temp NE (RxT) cement or RelyX U200 self-etching resin cement, under a 50 N (5 kg) load for 10 minutes. Twenty-four hours after cementation, the crowns were subjected to the pullout test in a universal test machine, at a 1.0 mm/min crosshead speed. The tests were performed first without cement to evaluate frictional resistance (Baseline), then with provisional cement (RelyX Temp NE without cement again (Baseline After RxT), and finally with resin cement (U200). The results were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey test (p < 0.05). Results: Data evaluation as a function of cement type demonstrated the superiority of resin-based cements relative to provisional and baseline groups (p < 0.01). While Co-Cr crowns presented the highest pullout strength values, Pr showed the lowest values (data collapsed over cement) (p < 0.001). Retentiveness data as a function of both factors demonstrated similar pullout resistance between groups without cement (p < 0.001), except Zr baseline. Also, Co-Cr presented higher pullout strength compared to other materials. Conclusions: Self-adhesive resin cement exhibited superior retention compared to temporary cement, regardless of crown material. Co-Cr and titanium presented higher levels of retention to Ti-base abutment after being cemented.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate the pullout resistance of CAD/CAM implant-supported crowns cemented with provisional and definitive cements on Ti-base implant abutments. Materials and Methods: Sixty crowns were milled for use in Ti-base implant abutments and divided (n = 15/group) according to material, as follows: (a) [Pr] Temporary acrylic resin; (b) [Co-Cr] Cobalt-Chromium alloy; (c) [Zr] polycrystalline zirconia; and (d) [Ti] titanium. The cementation was performed with RelyX Temp NE (RxT) cement or RelyX U200 self-etching resin cement, under a 50 N (5 kg) load for 10 minutes. Twenty-four hours after cementation, the crowns were subjected to the pullout test in a universal test machine, at a 1.0 mm/min crosshead speed. The tests were performed first without cement to evaluate frictional resistance (Baseline), then with provisional cement (RelyX Temp NE without cement again (Baseline After RxT), and finally with resin cement (U200). The results were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey test (p < 0.05). Results: Data evaluation as a function of cement type demonstrated the superiority of resin-based cements relative to provisional and baseline groups (p < 0.01). While Co-Cr crowns presented the highest pullout strength values, Pr showed the lowest values (data collapsed over cement) (p < 0.001). Retentiveness data as a function of both factors demonstrated similar pullout resistance between groups without cement (p < 0.001), except Zr baseline. Also, Co-Cr presented higher pullout strength compared to other materials. Conclusions: Self-adhesive resin cement exhibited superior retention compared to temporary cement, regardless of crown material. Co-Cr and titanium presented higher levels of retention to Ti-base abutment after being cemented.

KW - Abutment design

KW - CAD/CAM

KW - Dental cements

KW - Dental implants

KW - Dental materials

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050499316&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050499316&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jopr.12927

DO - 10.1111/jopr.12927

M3 - Article

C2 - 29961986

AN - SCOPUS:85050499316

JO - Journal of Prosthodontics

JF - Journal of Prosthodontics

SN - 1059-941X

ER -