Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The influence of the emergence profile on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant reconstructions.
Sancho-Puchades, M; Crameri, D; Özcan, M; Sailer, I; Jung, R E; Hämmerle, C H F; Thoma, D S.
Afiliação
  • Sancho-Puchades M; Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Crameri D; Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Özcan M; Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Sailer I; Division for Fixed Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Jung RE; Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Hämmerle CHF; Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Thoma DS; Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 28(12): 1515-1522, 2017 Dec.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28407306
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To test whether or not one of two emergence profile designs (concave or convex) is superior to the other in terms of remaining cement following cementation of reconstructions on individualized abutments and careful cement removal. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

A central incisor with a single implant-supported reconstruction was selected as a model. Six types of abutments (n = 10) with two different emergence profile designs (concave (CC) and convex (CV)) and three crown-abutment margin depths (epimucosal, 1.5 mm submucosal, 3 mm submucosal) were fabricated through a CAD/CAM procedure. Lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic crowns were cemented with chemically polymerized resin cement. A blinded investigator attempted to remove all cement excess. Thereafter, the entire reconstruction was unscrewed and analyzed for the overall amount and the depth of cement excess. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used to investigate differences between groups. When more than two groups were compared between each other, a Bonferroni correction of the P value was performed.

RESULTS:

Concave abutments presented significantly more cement remnants than CV abutments when the entire abutment area of the epimucosal margin groups was evaluated (CC0 mm mean 2.31 mm2 (SD 0.99) vs. CV0 mm mean 1.57 mm2 (SD 0.55); P = 0.043). A statistically significant increase in remnants was detected when the crown-abutment margin was located more submucosally for every abutment studied (0 mm vs. 1.5 mm P < 0.000, 0 mm vs 3 mm P < 0.000, 1.5 mm vs. 3 mm P < 0.000). The buccal quadrant demonstrated the least, whereas the oral and interdental quadrants showed the greatest amount of cement excess.

CONCLUSIONS:

Concave emergence profile abutments and deep crown-abutment margin positions increased the risk of cement excess. Oral and interdental areas are more prone to cement remnants than other surface areas.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cimentação / Planejamento de Prótese Dentária / Coroas / Cimentos Dentários Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Oral Implants Res Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cimentação / Planejamento de Prótese Dentária / Coroas / Cimentos Dentários Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Oral Implants Res Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article