Microleakage assessment of CAD-CAM Cobalt-Chrome and Zirconia abutments on a conical connection dental implant: A comparative in vitro study.
dental implant abutment connection
dental implant abutment design
dental implants
implant supported dental prosthesis
microleakage
polymerase chain reaction
Journal
Clinical oral implants research
ISSN: 1600-0501
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Implants Res
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 9105713
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Sep 2022
Historique:
revised:
19
06
2022
received:
28
11
2021
accepted:
22
06
2022
pubmed:
13
7
2022
medline:
8
9
2022
entrez:
12
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the marginal and bacterial microleakage in zirconia and CAD-CAM or cast Co-Cr implant abutments. Sixty-four conical connection implants with their respective abutments were divided into four groups (Co-Cr (milled, laser-sintered, and cast) and Zirconia (milled)). All specimens were subjected to a chewing simulation and thermocycling. After aging process, specimens were submerged in a 0.2% methylene blue solution with Porphyromonas gingivalis (P.g) for 48 h. The marginal microleakage was measured using a 40× optical microscopy at the internal part of the implant, and when positive microleakage was observed, a DNA isolation with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was used. The microbiological assessment was based on colony forming units (CFUs). Thirty (47%) implant-abutments presented microleakage and the PCR was performed on those specimens (1 Zirconia, 1 Co-Cr milled, 14 Co-Cr laser-sintered and 14 cast). Seven specimens (1 Co-Cr laser-sintered and six cast) presented values below the PCR detection limit (< 100 CFUs). The lowest CFUs count occurred in the Co-Cr milled group (5.17E+02 CFUs/ml) followed by zirconia (7.70E+03 CFUs/ml). The Co-Cr cast (9.39E+03 CFUs/ml) and laser-sintered (2.4E+05 CFUs/ml) groups had higher bacterial count. The CFU count comparison performed between Co-Cr cast and laser-sintered resulted in a statistically significant differences in favor of Co-CrCL (p < .05). The abutment material and fabrication technique affected the implant-abutment microleakage. Although the CAD-CAM abutments presented favorable results, all tested groups presented microleakage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35818785
doi: 10.1111/clr.13973
pmc: PMC9544167
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dental Implants
0
Cobalt
3G0H8C9362
Zirconium
C6V6S92N3C
Titanium
D1JT611TNE
zirconium oxide
S38N85C5G0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
945-952Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
J Prosthet Dent. 2019 May;121(5):775-781.e1
pubmed: 30617036
J Clin Periodontol. 1998 Feb;25(2):134-44
pubmed: 9495612
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Oct;23 Suppl 6:202-16
pubmed: 23062143
J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Jun;121(6):879-886.e4
pubmed: 30661882
Eur J Oral Implantol. 2016;9 Suppl 1:S155-62
pubmed: 27314122
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Jun;11(6):ZE10-ZE15
pubmed: 28764310
Arch Oral Biol. 2017 Nov;83:153-160
pubmed: 28780384
J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Dec;45(12):1510-1520
pubmed: 30289569
Int J Oral Surg. 1981 Dec;10(6):387-416
pubmed: 6809663
Materials (Basel). 2021 Apr 30;14(9):
pubmed: 33946477
Periodontol 2000. 2019 Oct;81(1):152-166
pubmed: 31407436
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Sep;25(9):1078-83
pubmed: 23822097
J Adv Prosthodont. 2014 Dec;6(6):491-7
pubmed: 25551010
J Am Dent Assoc. 2020 Apr;151(4):230-238.e7
pubmed: 32222175
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2022 Sep;33(9):945-952
pubmed: 35818785
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000 Dec;11(6):511-20
pubmed: 11168244
J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jun;45 Suppl 20:S286-S291
pubmed: 29926491
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Mar;19(3):242-8
pubmed: 18177429
Quintessence Int. 2019;50(3):176-184
pubmed: 30773569
J Periodontal Res. 2014 Feb;49(1):20-8
pubmed: 23581569
J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Mar;127(3):470-476
pubmed: 33309211
J Prosthodont Res. 2017 Jul;61(3):233-241
pubmed: 28359872
J Dent Res. 2021 Jan;100(1):21-28
pubmed: 32783779
J Periodontol. 2017 Oct;88(10):1066-1089
pubmed: 28625077
Periodontol 2000. 2005;38:135-87
pubmed: 15853940
J Adv Prosthodont. 2019 Apr;11(2):105-111
pubmed: 31080571
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Oct;23 Suppl 6:2-21
pubmed: 23062124
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Jul;32(7):853-862
pubmed: 33949004
Int J Prosthodont. 2019 Mar/Apr;32(2):182-192
pubmed: 30856643
Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2018 Jun 4;20:119-143
pubmed: 29865872
Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997 Aug;8(4):290-8
pubmed: 9586476
Eur J Dent. 2017 Oct-Dec;11(4):553-558
pubmed: 29279686
J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015 Jul;26(7):211
pubmed: 26174348
J Clin Med. 2020 Jul 24;9(8):
pubmed: 32722131
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007 Aug;18(4):501-8
pubmed: 17501978