International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 2 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2012 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Retention of Metal Crowns Luted to Implant Abutments of Two Different Diameters using Different Luting Agents

Jay Dipak Matani, Natasha Parulekar, Mohit Kheur, Shantanu Jambhekar, MK Supriya

Citation Information : Matani JD, Parulekar N, Kheur M, Jambhekar S, Supriya M. Retention of Metal Crowns Luted to Implant Abutments of Two Different Diameters using Different Luting Agents. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2012; 2 (3):96-100.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1056

Published Online: 01-09-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Purpose

The desirable properties of a luting agent used for implant prostheses are adequate tensile strength for retention and at the same time render the crowns to be retrievable. No studies have reported a comparison of the retention of implant crowns luted with zinc phosphate and polymeric cements. Studying the retentive abilities of these cements utilizing varying sizes of implant abutments may provide new insights into their clinical behaviors.

Aim

To compare the retentive abilities of two luting agents, using them to lute crowns on implant abutments of different diameters.

Materials and methods

Two implants (3.7 and 6.0 mm diameter) were embedded in a resin block. Straight abutments of corresponding diameters were screwed into the implants. The height of abutments was kept equal for both abutments (8 mm). Seven copings were fabricated for each abutment. Groups 1 and 2 copings (14 copings) were tested for both luting agents; zinc phosphate and polymeric cement using a universal testing machine.

Results

For the abutment diameters tested, the retentive values of zinc phosphate was significantly greater than polymeric implant cement. For the broad abutment, zinc phosphate was significantly more retentive than polymeric implant cement. For the narrow abutment, retentive values of zinc phosphate and polymeric implant cement were almost similar.

Conclusion

The retentive values of zinc phosphate were significantly greater than polymeric implant cement. For broad abutment, zinc phosphate was more retentive whereas for narrow abutment, retentive values were almost similar.

How to cite this article

Matani JD, Parulekar N, Kheur M, Jambhekar S, Supriya MK. Retention of Metal Crowns Luted to Implant Abutments of Two Different Diameters using Different Luting Agents. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2012;2(3):96-100.


PDF Share
  1. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: A critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:719-28.
  2. Failures and complications in 127 consecutively placed fixed partial prostheses supported by Brånemark implants: From prosthetic treatment to first annual check-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:40-44.
  3. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 2001;16:793-98.
  4. The effect of luting agents on the retention and marginal adaptation of the CeraOne implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:660-65.
  5. Use of luting agents with an implant system: Part I. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:737-41.
  6. Factors influencing the retention of cemented gold castings. J Prosthet Dent 1961;11(3):487-502.
  7. Some physical properties of implant abutment luting cements. Int J Prosthodont 1992:5:321-25.
  8. Evaluation of the retention of castings to endosseous dental implants. J Prothet Dent 1987;58(1):73-78.
  9. 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: 344-48.
  10. Screw-retained versus cement-retained implantsupported prosthesis. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1995;7(9):15-18.
  11. Implant-supported fixed prosthesis. In: Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics (4th ed). New Delhi: Elsevier 2006:397-40.
  12. The effect of cementing agent and technique on the retention of a CeraOne Gold Cylinder: A pilot study. Implant Dent 1995;4:32-34.
  13. Cement-retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures: A 6-month to 3-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:645-49.
  14. The effect of taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cementretained implant-supported restorations. J Prostho 2003; 12(2):111-15.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.