In Vitro Simulation of Dental Implant Bridges Removal: Influence of Luting Agent and Abutments Geometry on Retrievability

Overview

Journal Materials (Basel)

Publisher MDPI

Date 2020 Jun 25

PMID 32575862

Citations 4

Authors

Andrea T Lugas

Mara Terzini

Elisabetta M Zanetti

Gianmario Schierano

Carlo Manzella

Domenico Baldi

Cristina Bignardi

Alberto L Audenino

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Implant fixed dental prostheses are widely used for the treatment of edentulism, often preferred over the screw-retained ones. However, one of the main features of an implant-supported prosthesis is retrievability, which could be necessary in the case of implant complications. In this study, the retrievability of implant-fixed dental prostheses was investigated considering two of the main factors dental practitioners have to deal with: the abutments geometry and the luting agent. Impulsive forces were applied to dental bridge models to simulate crowns' retrievability in clinical conditions. The number of impulses and the impulsive force delivered during each test were recorded and used as retrievability indexes. One-hundred-and-five tests were conducted on 21 combinations of bridges and luting agents, and a Kruskal-Wallis test was performed on the results. The abutment geometry significantly influenced the number of impulses needed for retrieval ( < 0.05), and a cement-dependent trend was observed as well. On the other hand, the forces measured during tests showed no clear correlation with bridge retrievability. The best retrievability was obtained with long, slightly tapered abutments and a temporary luting agent.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of the dislodgement force of splinted restorations with engaging conical abutments over multiple nonparallel implants (in-vitro study).

Khamis M, Zakaria N, Farrag K, Abolgheit S BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):300.

PMID: 37198623 PMC: 10190041. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-02958-4.

The effect of different methods of cleansing temporary cement (with and without eugenol) on the final bond strength of implant-supported zirconia copings after final cementation: An study.

Bajoghli F, Fathi A, Ebadian B, Jowkar M, Sabouhi M Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2023; 20:22.

PMID: 36960017 PMC: 10028587. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.369624.

Novel Load Systems for Testing of Biomaterials and Medical Devices.

Bignardi C, Terzini M Materials (Basel). 2023; 16(2).

PMID: 36676202 PMC: 9863571. DOI: 10.3390/ma16020465.

Application of Semipermanent Cements and Conventional Cement with Modified Cementing Technique in Dental Implantology.

Veselinovic V, Marin S, Tatic Z, Trtic N, Dolic O, Adamovic T Acta Stomatol Croat. 2022; 55(4):367-379.

PMID: 35001932 PMC: 8734451. DOI: 10.15644/asc55/4/4.

References

Schiessl C, Schaefer L, Winter C, Fuerst J, Rosentritt M, Zeman F . Factors determining the retentiveness of luting agents used with metal- and ceramic-based implant components. Clin Oral Investig. 2012; 17(4):1179-90. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0798-x. View

Hill E, Lott J . A clinically focused discussion of luting materials. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56 Suppl 1:67-76. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01297.x. View

Al Hamad K, Al Rashdan B, Abu-Sitta E . The effects of height and surface roughness of abutments and the type of cement on bond strength of cement-retained implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010; 22(6):638-44. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02011.x. View

Heinemann F, Mundt T, Biffar R . Retrospective evaluation of temporary cemented, tooth and implant supported fixed partial dentures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006; 34 Suppl 2:86-90. DOI: 10.1016/S1010-5182(06)60019-X. View

Mehl C, Harder S, Wolfart M, Kern M, Wolfart S . Retrievability of implant-retained crowns following cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19(12):1304-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01587.x. View

Wittneben J, Joda T, Weber H, Bragger U . Screw retained vs. cement retained implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis. Periodontol 2000. 2016; 73(1):141-151. DOI: 10.1111/prd.12168. View

Schwarz S, Schroder C, Corcodel N, Hassel A, Rammelsberg P . Retrospective comparison of semipermanent and permanent cementation of implant-supported single crowns and FDPs with regard to the incidence of survival and complications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011; 14 Suppl 1:e151-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00396.x. View

Shadid R, Sadaqa N . A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review. J Oral Implantol. 2010; 38(3):298-307. DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00146. View

Mehl C, Harder S, Schwarz D, Steiner M, Vollrath O, Kern M . In vitro influence of ultrasonic stress, removal force preload and thermocycling on the retrievability of implant-retained crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 23(8):930-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02236.x. View

10.

Bignardi C, Zanetti E, Terzini M, Ciccola A, Schierano G, Audenino A . Reliability, Learnability and Efficiency of Two Tools for Cement Crowns Retrieval in Dentistry. Open Biomed Eng J. 2018; 12:27-35. PMC: 6048821. DOI: 10.2174/1874120701812010027. View

11.

Menini M, Piccardo P, Baldi D, Dellepiane E, Pera P . Morphological and chemical characteristics of different titanium surfaces treated by bicarbonate and glycine powder air abrasive systems. Implant Dent. 2015; 24(1):47-56. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000176. View

12.

Mehl C, Harder S, Steiner M, Vollrath O, Kern M . Influence of cement film thickness on the retention of implant-retained crowns. J Prosthodont. 2013; 22(8):618-25. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12058. View

13.

Bresciano M, Schierano G, Manzella C, Screti A, Bignardi C, Preti G . Retention of luting agents on implant abutments of different height and taper. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16(5):594-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01159.x. View

14.

Manzella C, Burello V, Bignardi C, Carossa S, Schierano G . A method to improve passive fit of frameworks on implant-supported prostheses: an in vivo study. Int J Prosthodont. 2013; 26(6):577-9. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.3326. View

15.

Mehl C, Ali S, El Bahra S, Harder S, Vollrath O, Kern M . Is There a Correlation Between Tensile Strength and Retrievability of Cemented Implant-Retained Crowns Using Artificial Aging?. Int J Prosthodont. 2016; 29(1):83-90. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4317. View

16.

Naik S, Tredwin C, Nesbit M, Setchell D, Moles D . The effect of engaging the screw access channel of an implant abutment with a cement-retained restoration. J Prosthodont. 2009; 18(3):245-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00408.x. View

17.

Akca K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli M . Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17(4):536-42. View

18.

Emms M, Tredwin C, Setchell D, Moles D . The effects of abutment wall height, platform size, and screw access channel filling method on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. J Prosthodont. 2007; 16(1):3-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00150.x. View

19.

Breeding L, Dixon D, Bogacki M, Tietge J . Use of luting agents with an implant system: Part I. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 68(5):737-41. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(92)90194-f. View

20.

Zanetti E, Pascoletti G, Cali M, Bignardi C, Franceschini G . Clinical Assessment of Dental Implant Stability During Follow-Up: What Is Actually Measured, and Perspectives. Biosensors (Basel). 2018; 8(3). PMC: 6165397. DOI: 10.3390/bios8030068. View