Traction required for removal of cemented cast crown copings in dental implant abutments.
PDF (Português (Brasil))

Keywords

Implant prosthesis
Implantology
Cented crowns

How to Cite

Alderete Llamosa, A. ., Pelegrine, A. A., Calistro, L. C. ., Neves Ramos, A. H. ., Coelho Paraguassu, Éber ., Vieira, R. ., Fernandes Tinoco, E. J., & Basting, R. . (2020). Traction required for removal of cemented cast crown copings in dental implant abutments. Brazilian Journal of Implantology and Health Sciences, 2(3), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.36557/2674-8169.2020v2n3p26-36

Abstract

Introduction: Implant-supported fixed prostheses are alternative treatments increasingly common in dental clinics. They can be screwed or cemented depending on the surgical planning. Screwed prostheses are reversible, have greater bacterial infiltrate, aesthetics impaired by the screw hole. Cemented prostheses have reversal difficulties, loss of the prosthesis in case of screw loosening and better aesthetics due to the lack of screw hole.

Objectives: In this context, the present study aims to evaluate the tensile strength levels of cemented copping´s by 2 different types of cement for fixation of cemented implant-supported crowns.

Methodology: Three specimens were made with implants and crowns cemented with different materials, where each of these specimens was submitted to a traction test.

Results: Zinc phosphate cemented copping's (CP1 and CP4) required a tensile strength of 118.02 N and 213.63 N respectively, while resin cemented copping's (C2 and C3) required a tensile strength of 258.93 N and 228.87 N respectively.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of the current in vitro conditions employed in this study, retention of cemented crown copping's in the resin abutment and zinc phosphate cement implant abutments was significantly affected by the cement type. Resin cement required significantly higher tensile strength than zinc phosphate cement for removal of copipngs.

https://doi.org/10.36557/2674-8169.2020v2n3p26-36
PDF (Português (Brasil))

References

1. Bonfante EA. Confiabilidade e modo de fratura de próteses fixas implantosuportadas metalocerâmicas e em zircônia [tese]. Bauru (SP): Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru; 2009.

2. Dudlley JE, Richards LC, Abbott JR. Retention of cast crown copings cemented to implant abutments. Australian Dental Journal 2008;53:332-339.

3. Schwarz S, Schroder C, Corcodel N, Hassel AJ, Rammelsberg P. Retrospective comparison of semipermanent and permanent cementation of implant-supported single crowns and FDPs with regard to the incidence survival and complications. Clinical Implant Denrtistry and Related Research 2012;14(1):151-158.

4. Chaar MS, Att W, Strub JR. Prosthetic outcome of cement-retained implantsupported fixed dental restorations: a systematic review. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2011;38:697-711.

5 Bernal G, Okamura M, Munoz CA. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implantsupported restorations. J Prosthodont 2003;12:111-115.

6. Hill EE, Lott J. A clinically focused discussion of luting materials. Australian Dental Journal 2011;56(1):67-76.

Authors are copyright holders under a CCBY 4.0 license.