Comparison of retention of monolithic zirconia crowns with alumina airborne-particle abraded and nonabraded intaglio using three different cements: A clinical simulation.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The necessity of roughening the intaglio surface of zirconia crowns to achieve adequate retention is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical simulation study was to evaluate the retention of airborne-particle-abraded and nonabraded monolithic zirconia crowns using 3 different cement types. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Extracted human molars were used and prepared with a 10-degree taper. Impressions were made of the prepared teeth with a polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) material, and dies were made with Type 4 gypsum. Each die was scanned with a NobelProcera 1G Scanner, and the standard tessellation language (STL) files were transferred electronically to the Nobel Biocare production site, where a bar was added virtually on top of each crown and parameters were set for milling. Seventy-two Procera zirconia crowns were generated, of which half were airborne-particle abraded on the intaglio surface with 50-µm alumina particles at 400 to 500 kPa for 15 seconds. The other 36 received no intaglio treatment other than cleaning. Both groups of 36 crowns were divided into 3 subgroups of 12 specimens. The area of each preparation was calculated using a computer-aided design software program. The specimens were distributed to attain similar mean surface areas among the cementation groups. The crowns were cemented onto the specimen with a controlled force of 196 N. The 3 cements used were self-adhesive, modified resin RelyX Unicem Aplicap, resin-modified glass ionomer RelyX Luting, and a composite resin, Panavia F2.0 with ED Primer A & B. All specimens were thermocycled (5 °C to 55 °C) for 5000 cycles and then removed axially with a universal testing machine (Instron Model 5585H) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The removal force was recorded, and stress of dislodgement was calculated for each crown. A 2-way analysis of variance was used for statistical analyses. The type of failure was analyzed with the chi-squared test of association for independent samples (α=.05 for all tests). RESULTS: The mean dislodging force for crowns with airborne-particle abraded intaglio was 5.4 MPa, which was statistically greater than the mean of 3.2 MPa for nonabraded specimens (P<.001). No significant differences related to the dislodging stresses were detected among the 3 cements (P=.109). The mode of failure was similar whether abraded or not, with 50% of specimens retaining cement in the crown after separation. CONCLUSIONS: Alumina airborne-particle abrasion of the intaglio of zirconia to create surface roughness is beneficial in retaining the crowns, regardless of the cement type. The nonabraded crowns demonstrated significantly lower retentive stress with crown removal. The principal mode of failure was similar whether the zirconia intaglio was airborne-particle abraded or not. The most common mode of failure (>50% of specimens) was at least three-fourths of the cement remaining within the crown.

Retention of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns with three types of cement.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Information about the retentive strength of luting agents for zirconium oxide-based crowns is limited. It is unknown if this type of high-strength ceramic restoration requires adhesive cementation to enhance retention. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the ability of selected luting agents to retain a representative zirconium oxide ceramic crown under clinically simulated conditions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Recently extracted human molars were prepared with a flat occlusal surface, 20-degree taper, and approximately 4-mm axial length. The axial and occlusal surface areas were determined, and specimens were distributed equally by total surface area into 3 cementation groups (n=12). Zirconium oxide ceramic copings (Procera AllZirkon) with an occlusal bar to facilitate removal were fabricated using computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology. All copings were airborne-particle abraded with 50-mum Al(2)O(3) and then cleaned in an ultrasonic bath with isopropyl alcohol. Provisional cement was removed from the prepared teeth, followed by a pumice prophy. After trial insertion, the copings were cleaned with phosphoric acid, rinsed, dried, and dehydrated with isopropyl alcohol. They were then cemented with a seating force of 10 kg per tooth, using either a composite resin cement with adhesive agent (Panavia F 2.0 and ED Primer A & B [PAN]), a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Rely X Luting [RXL]), or a self-adhesive modified composite resin (Rely X Unicem [RXU]). The cemented copings were thermal cycled at 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 5000 cycles with a 15 second dwell time, and then removed along the path of insertion using a universal testing machine at 0.5 mm/min. The removal force was recorded, and the stress of dislodgement was calculated using the surface area of each preparation. A 1-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the data (alpha=.05). The nature of failure was also recorded. RESULTS: Mean dislodgement stresses were 5.1, 6.1, and 5.0 MPa for PAN, RXL, and RXU, respectively. The 1-way analysis of variance revealed no differences in mean crown removal stress among the 3 cementation groups. The predominant mode of failure was cement remaining principally on the zirconium oxide copings in 46% of the specimens, followed by cement found on the tooth in 25.7% of the specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the 3 luting agents, with mean removal stresses ranging from 5.0 to 6.1 MPa were not significantly different. The use of a composite resin cement with a bonding agent did not yield higher coping retention compared to the other 2 cements tested.