Top

International Journal of Implant Dentistry

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Research

Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro

Authors: Felix Dähne, Heike Meißner, Klaus Böning, Christin Arnold, Ralf Gutwald, Elisabeth Prause

Published in: International Journal of Implant Dentistry | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to examine the retention force of monolithic zirconia copings cemented with various temporary cements on implant abutments in vitro.

Methods

Sixty exercise implants with pre-screwed implant abutments were embedded in resin. Subsequently, 60 CAD/CAM manufactured zirconia copings were divided into three main groups [Harvard Implant Semi-permanent (HAV), implantlink semi Forte (IMP), Temp Bond NE (TBNE)]. The zirconia copings were cemented on the implant abutments and loaded with 35 N. Specimens were stored in distilled water (37 °C) for 24 h. Half of the test specimens of each group were subjected to a thermocycling (TC) process. Retention force was measured in a universal testing machine. Using magnifying glasses, the fracture mode was determined. Statistical analysis was performed applying the Kruskal-Wallis test, the post hoc test according to Dunn-Bonferroni and a chi-square test of independence.

Results

Without TC, IMP showed the highest retention of the three temporary luting agents (100.5 ± 39.14 N). The measured retention forces of IMP were higher than those of HAV (45.78 ± 15.66 N) and TBNE (61.16 ± 20.19 N). After TC, retention was reduced. IMP showed the greatest retentive strength (21.69 ± 13.61 N, three fail outs). HAV and TBNE showed pull-off forces of similar magnitude (17.38 ± 12.77 N and 16.97 ± 12.36 N, two fail outs). The fracture mode analysis showed different results regarding the tested cements before and after TC (facture type before/after TC): IMP (III+II/III), HAV (I/II) and TBNE (III/III). There were clear differences of the fracture modes regarding the examination before and after TC.

Conclusions

Within the limits of this study, IMP showed the highest pull-off forces under the chosen test conditions. All three temporary luting agents showed lower retention forces after TC. Retention values in the individual cement classes were very heterogeneous. Easy cement removal in the crown lumen favours the dominance of adhesive cement fractures on the abutment and adhesive/cohesive cement fractures on the abutment with HAV appears advantageous in case of recementation of the superstructure.

Mehl C, Harder S, Wolfart M, Kern M, Wolfart S. Retrievability of implant-retained crowns following cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(12):1304–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01587.x.CrossRefPubMed

Mehl C, Harder S, Steiner M, Vollrath O, Kern M. Influence of cement film thickness on the retention of implant-retained crowns. J Prosthodont. 2013;22(8):618–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12058.CrossRefPubMed

Chee W, Felton DA, Johnson PF, Sullivan DY. Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: which is better? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14(1):137–41.PubMed

Thoma DS, Wolleb K, Bienz SP, Wiedemeier D, Hammerle CHF, Sailer I. Early histological, microbiological, radiological, and clinical response to cemented and screw-retained all-ceramic single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(10):996–1006. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13366.CrossRefPubMed

Schiessl C, Schaefer L, Winter C, Fuerst J, Rosentritt M, Zeman F, et al. Factors determining the retentiveness of luting agents used with metal- and ceramic-based implant components. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(4):1179–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0798-x.CrossRefPubMed

Torrado E, Ercoli C, Al Mardini M, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L. A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2004;91(6):532–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.03.014.CrossRefPubMed

Weber HP, Kim DM, Ng MW, Hwang JW, Fiorellini JP. Peri-implant soft-tissue health surrounding cement- and screw-retained implant restorations: a multi-center, 3-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(4):375–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01232.x.CrossRefPubMed

Duyck J, Naert I. Influence of prosthesis fit and the effect of a luting system on the prosthetic connection preload: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15(4):389–96.PubMed

Pietrabissa R, Gionso L, Quaglini V, Di Martino E, Simion M. An in vitro study on compensation of mismatch of screw versus cement-retained implant supported fixed prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(5):448–57. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011005448.x.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Rodiger M, Rinke S, Ehret-Kleinau F, Pohlmeyer F, Lange K, Burgers R, et al. Evaluation of removal forces of implant-supported zirconia copings depending on abutment geometry, luting agent and cleaning method during re-cementation. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(3):233–40. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.3.233.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Heinemann F, Mundt T, Biffar R. Retrospective evaluation of temporary cemented, tooth and implant supported fixed partial dentures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006;34(Suppl 2):86–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-5182(06)60019-X.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Dixon DL, Breeding LC, Lilly KR. Use of luting agents with an implant system: Part II. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68(6):885–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90544-K.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Bogacki MT, Tietge JD. Use of luting agents with an implant system: Part I. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68(5):737–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90194-F.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Covey DA, Kent DK, St Germain HA Jr, Koka S. Effects of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83(3):344–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(00)70138-7.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Di Felice R, Rappelli G, Camaioni E, Cattani M, Meyer JM, Belser UC. Cementable implant crowns composed of cast superstructure frameworks luted to electroformed primary copings: an in vitro retention study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18(1):108–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01299.x.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Dudley JE, Richards LC, Abbott JR. Retention of cast crown copings cemented to implant abutments. Aust Dent J. 2008;53(4):332–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2008.00075.x.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Kaar D, Oshida Y, Andres CJ, Barco MT, Platt JA. The effect of fatigue damage on the force required to remove a restoration in a cement-retained implant system. J Prosthodont. 2006;15(5):289–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00126.x.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Garg P, Gupta G, Prithviraj DR, Pujari M. Retentiveness of various luting agents used with implant-supported prostheses: a preliminary in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26(1):82–4. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.2572.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Alvarez-Arenal A, Gonzalez-Gonzalez I, Pines-Hueso J. deLlanos-Lanchares H, del Rio Highsmith J. The effect of compressive cyclic loading on the retention of cast single crowns cemented to implant abutments. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29(1):80–2. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4355.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Blender SM, Mellinghoff J, Groller SB, Schnutenhaus S, Kuhn K, Luthardt RG, et al. Effects of abutment height and type of cements on bond strength of monolithic zirconia single crowns luted to one-piece zirconia implants. Int J Prosthodont. 2021.

21.

Naumova EA, Roth F, Geis B, Baulig C, Arnold WH, Piwowarczyk A. Influence of luting materials on the retention of cemented implant-supported crowns: an in vitro study. Materials (Basel). 2018;11(10).

22.

Pan YH, Lin CK. The effect of luting agents on the retention of dental implant-supported crowns. Chang Gung Med J. 2005;28(6):403–10.PubMed

23.

Guler U, Budak Y, Queiroz JRC, Ozcan M. Dislodgement resistance of zirconia copings cemented onto zirconia and titanium abutments. Implant Dent. 2017;26(4):510–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000589.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Gumus HO, Kurtulus IL, Kuru E. Evaluation and comparison of the film thicknesses of six temporary cements before and after thermal cycling. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018;21(12):1656–61. https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_382_17.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Guncu MB, Cakan U, Canay S. Comparison of 3 luting agents on retention of implant-supported crowns on 2 different abutments. Implant Dent. 2011;20(5):349–53. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e318225f68e.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Kokubo Y, Kano T, Tsumita M, Sakurai S, Itayama A, Fukushima S. Retention of zirconia copings on zirconia implant abutments cemented with provisional luting agents. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37(1):48–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02013.x.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Kurt M, Kulunk T, Ural C, Kulunk S, Danisman S, Savas S. The effect of different surface treatments on cement-retained implant-supported restorations. J Oral Implantol. 2013;39(1):44–51. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00151.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Lennartz A, Dohmen A, Bishti S, Fischer H, Wolfart S. Retrievability of implant-supported zirconia restorations cemented on zirconia abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(5):740–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.011.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Lewinstein I, Block L, Lehr Z, Ormianer Z, Matalon S. An in vitro assessment of circumferential grooves on the retention of cement-retained implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2011;106(6):367–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60149-2.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Mehl C, Harder S, Schwarz D, Steiner M, Vollrath O, Kern M. In vitro influence of ultrasonic stress, removal force preload and thermocycling on the retrievability of implant-retained crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(8):930–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02236.x.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Mehl C, Ali S, El Bahra S, Harder S, Vollrath O, Kern M. Is there a correlation between tensile strength and retrievability of cemented implant-retained crowns using artificial aging? Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29(1):83–90. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4317.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Nejatidanesh F, Savabi O, Shahtoosi M. Retention of implant-supported zirconium oxide ceramic restorations using different luting agents. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(Suppl A100):20–4.CrossRef

33.

Nejatidanesh F, Savabi O, Savabi G, Razavi M. Effect of cleaning methods on retentive values of saliva-contaminated implant-supported zirconia copings. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(5):530–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13150.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Pan YH, Ramp LC, Lin CK, Liu PR. Retention and leakage of implant-supported restorations luted with provisional cement: a pilot study. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34(3):206–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01673.x.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Pitta J, Bijelic-Donova J, Burkhardt F, Fehmer V, Narhi T, Sailer I. Temporary implant-supported single crowns using titanium base abutments: an in vitro study on bonding stability and pull-out forces. Int J Prosthodont. 2020;33(5):546–52. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.6778.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Pitta J, Burkhardt F, Mekki M, Fehmer V, Mojon P, Sailer I. Effect of airborne-particle abrasion of a titanium base abutment on the stability of the bonded interface and retention forces of crowns after artificial aging. J Prosthet Dent. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.06.013.

37.

Rohr N, Balmer M, Muller JA, Martin S, Fischer J. Chewing simulation of zirconia implant supported restorations. J Prosthodont Res. 2019;63(3):361–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2019.02.002.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Rues S, Fugina M, Rammelsberg P, Kappel S. Cemented single crown retention on dental implants: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(2):133–5. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4994.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Sellers K, Powers JM, Kiat-Amnuay S. Retentive strength of implant-supported CAD-CAM lithium disilicate crowns on zirconia custom abutments using 6 different cements. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(2):247–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.06.014.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Gultekin P, Gultekin BA, Aydin M, Yalcin S. Cement selection for implant-supported crowns fabricated with different luting space settings. J Prosthodont. 2013;22(2):112–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00912.x.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Sheets JL, Wilcox C, Wilwerding T. Cement selection for cement-retained crown technique with dental implants. J Prosthodont. 2008;17(2):92–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00262.x.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Safari S, Hosseini Ghavam F, Amini P, Yaghmaei K. Effects of abutment diameter, luting agent type, and re-cementation on the retention of implant-supported CAD/CAM metal copings over short abutments. J Adv Prosthodont. 2018;10(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.1.1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Chintapalli RK, Mestra Rodriguez A, Garcia Marro F, Anglada M. Effect of sandblasting and residual stress on strength of zirconia for restorative dentistry applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014;29:126–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.09.004.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Kern M. Bonding to oxide ceramics-laboratory testing versus clinical outcome. Dent Mater. 2015;31(1):8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.06.007.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Nejatidanesh F, Savabi O, Ebrahimi M, Savabi G. Retentiveness of implant-supported metal copings using different luting agents. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012;9(1):13–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.92921.CrossRef

46.

Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent. 1999;27(2):89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(98)00037-2.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Carnaggio TV, Conrad R, Engelmeier RL, Gerngross P, Paravina R, Perezous L, et al. Retention of CAD/CAM all-ceramic crowns on prefabricated implant abutments: an in vitro comparative study of luting agents and abutment surface area. J Prosthodont. 2012;21(7):523–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00847.x.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Rohr N, Brunner S, Martin S, Fischer J. Influence of cement type and ceramic primer on retention of polymer-infiltrated ceramic crowns to a one-piece zirconia implant. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(1):138–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.02.002.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Abbo B, Razzoog ME, Vivas J, Sierraalta M. Resistance to dislodgement of zirconia copings cemented onto titanium abutments of different heights. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99(1):25–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60005-0.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Sarfaraz H, Hassan A, Shenoy KK, Shetty M. An in vitro study to compare the influence of newer luting cements on retention of cement-retained implant-supported prosthesis. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2019;19(2):166–72. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_235_18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Santosa RE, Martin W, Morton D. Effects of a cementing technique in addition to luting agent on the uniaxial retention force of a single-tooth implant-supported restoration: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25(6):1145–52.PubMed

52.

Pan YH, Ramp LC, Lin CK, Liu PR. Comparison of 7 luting protocols and their effect on the retention and marginal leakage of a cement-retained dental implant restoration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;21(4):587–92.PubMed

53.

Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16(6):793–8.PubMed

54.

Michalakis K, Pissiotis AL, Kang K, Hirayama H, Garefis PD, Petridis H. The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22(4):569–74.PubMed

55.

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(4):536–42.PubMed

56.

Ebert A, Hedderich J, Kern M. Retention of zirconia ceramic copings bonded to titanium abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22(6):921–7.PubMed

57.

Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13(4):343–8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130401.x.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Rosentritt M, Steiger D, Behr M, Handel G, Kolbeck C. Influence of substructure design and spacer settings on the in vitro performance of molar zirconia crowns. J Dent. 2009;37(12):978–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.08.003.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Carter SM, Wilson PR. The effect of die-spacing on crown retention. Int J Prosthodont. 1996;9(1):21–9.PubMed

60.

Wu JC, Wilson PR. Optimal cement space for resin luting cements. Int J Prosthodont. 1994;7(3):209–15.PubMed

61.

Kim Y, Yamashita J, Shotwell JL, Chong KH, Wang HL. The comparison of provisional luting agents and abutment surface roughness on the retention of provisional implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;95(6):450–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.03.020.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Emtiaz S, Goldstein G. Effect of die spacers on precementation space of complete-coverage restorations. Int J Prosthodont. 1997;10(2):131–5.PubMed

63.

Webb EL, Murray HV, Holland GA, Taylor DF. Effects of preparation relief and flow channels on seating full coverage castings during cementation. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;49(6):777–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90347-5.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Akashia AE, Francischone 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(4):309–15.PubMed

65.

Jacob SJ, Hegde C, Prasad KD, Shetty M. An in vitro study to evaluate the effect of storage time and application of subsequent layers on the variation in thickness of three commercially available die spacers. Indian J Dent Res. 2010;21(1):92–7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.62822.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro
Authors: Felix Dähne
Heike Meißner
Klaus Böning
Christin Arnold
Ralf Gutwald
Elisabeth Prause
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: International Journal of Implant Dentistry / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 2198-4034
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-021-00349-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Accuracy of guided surgery using the silicon impression and digital impression method for the mandibular free end: a comparative study

A systematic review on the implication of Candida in peri-implantitis

Indications for 3-D diagnostics and navigation in dental implantology with the focus on radiation exposure: a systematic review

Implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a retrospective case series study in a daily dental practice

Variations in vertical mucosal thickness at edentulous ridge according to site and gender measured by cone-beam computed tomography

Comparison of the performances of low-crystalline carbonate apatite and Bio-Oss in sinus augmentation using three-dimensional image analysis