In vitro study of the tensile bond strength of cement-eetained single implant prosthesis by the various provisional luting cements and the surface treatment of abutments.
- Author:
Hwa Yeon LEE
1
;
Ho Sang LEE
Author Information
1. Division of Prosthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Uijongbu St.Mary 's Hospital, Catholic University of Korea, Korea.johanna@cmc.cuk.ac.kr
- Publication Type:In Vitro ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Tensile bond strength;
Single implant;
Provisional luting cement;
Surface treatment
- MeSH:
Aluminum Oxide;
Crowns;
Dental Cements;
Eugenol;
Petrolatum;
Prostheses and Implants*;
Water;
Zinc Oxide
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2002;40(3):296-305
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
The main disadvantage of cement-retained implant restorations is their difficulty in retriev-ability. Advocates of cemented implant restorations frequently state that retrievability of the restoration can be maintained if a provisional cement is used. The purpose of this study was to find the optimal properties of provisional luting cements and the surface treatment of abutments in single implant abutment system. 30 prefabricated implant abutments, height 8mm, diameter 6mm, 3-degree taper per side, with light chamfer margins were obtained. Three commercially available provisional luting agents which were all zinc oxide eugenol type ; Cavitec, TempBond and TempBond NE were eval-uated. No cement served as the control. TempBond along with vaseline, a kind of petrolatum(2:1 ratio) was also evaluated. Ten out of thirty abutments were randomly selected and abutment surfaces were sandblasted with 50 mu m aluminum oxide. Another ten abutments were sandblasted with 250 mu m aluminum oxide. A vertical groove, 1 mm deep and 5mm long was cut in each twenty abutments. Ten of them were sandblasted with 50 mu m aluminum oxide. The full coverage casting crowns were cemented to the abutments with the designat-ed provisional luting agent. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours. Each specimen was attached to a universal testing machine. A crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min was used to apply a tensile force to each specimen. Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the following conclusions were drawn: 1. Tensile bond strength of provisional luting cements in no surface treatment decreased with the sequence of TempBond NE, TempBond, Cavitec, TempBond with vaseline, no cement. 2. Tensile bond strength more increased by surface treatment. Sandblasting with 250 mumaluminum oxide exhibited the highest tensile bond strength in the abutment cemented with TempBond NE and sandblasting with 50 mu m aluminum oxide exhibited the highest tensile bond strength in cemented with TempBond. 3. In the aspect of a groove formation, tensile bond strength significantly increased in TempBond with vaseline only and the others had no significant effect on tensile bond strength.
