Retention of hybrid-abutment-crowns with offset implant placement: influence of Crown materials and Ti-base height.
CAD/CAM
Ceramics
Implant
Retention
Titanium base
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 10 2023
24 10 2023
Historique:
received:
18
07
2023
accepted:
04
10
2023
medline:
26
10
2023
pubmed:
25
10
2023
entrez:
24
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The purpose of the current study was to assess the impact of three esthetic CAD/CAM material, titanium base height and their interaction on the retention strength of a hybrid-abutment-crown. A total of 42 hybrid-abutment crowns with identical external geometries were designed in CAD software to fit two different Ti-Base abutment heights (n = 42/abutment height): either short (S) with 4 mm (n = 21) or long (L) 7 mm (n = 21) height. Each main group was divided into 3 subgroups (n = 7), according to esthetic crown material, Zirconia (Z), Lithium disilicate (L) and Hybrid ceramic (V). A universal primer and an adhesive resin cement were used for bonding according to the manufacturer instructions. Artificial aging in form of water storage (30 days), chewing simulation (50,000-cycles, 49 N, 1.67 Hz) and thermal cyclic (5000 cycles at 5-55 °C) were applied, specimens were pulled-out under tension load in (N) using a universal testing machine. Two and one-way ANOVA and Post Hoc Tukey test were used for statistical analysis. Long lithium disilicate (LL) group showed the highest retention (738.7 ± 178.5) followed by short lithium disilicate (LS) group (688.6 ± 169.9). Meanwhile, short zirconia (ZS) showed the lowest retention strength (231.1 ± 86.9). CAD/CAM fabricated lithium disilicate hybrid-abutment-crown can be used instead of conventional crowns over implant abutment. Etchable ceramics are recommended as a material of choice for CAD/CAM fabricated hybrid-abutment-crowns instead of zirconia in terms of retention durability.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The purpose of the current study was to assess the impact of three esthetic CAD/CAM material, titanium base height and their interaction on the retention strength of a hybrid-abutment-crown.
METHODS
A total of 42 hybrid-abutment crowns with identical external geometries were designed in CAD software to fit two different Ti-Base abutment heights (n = 42/abutment height): either short (S) with 4 mm (n = 21) or long (L) 7 mm (n = 21) height. Each main group was divided into 3 subgroups (n = 7), according to esthetic crown material, Zirconia (Z), Lithium disilicate (L) and Hybrid ceramic (V). A universal primer and an adhesive resin cement were used for bonding according to the manufacturer instructions. Artificial aging in form of water storage (30 days), chewing simulation (50,000-cycles, 49 N, 1.67 Hz) and thermal cyclic (5000 cycles at 5-55 °C) were applied, specimens were pulled-out under tension load in (N) using a universal testing machine. Two and one-way ANOVA and Post Hoc Tukey test were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
Long lithium disilicate (LL) group showed the highest retention (738.7 ± 178.5) followed by short lithium disilicate (LS) group (688.6 ± 169.9). Meanwhile, short zirconia (ZS) showed the lowest retention strength (231.1 ± 86.9).
CONCLUSION
CAD/CAM fabricated lithium disilicate hybrid-abutment-crown can be used instead of conventional crowns over implant abutment. Etchable ceramics are recommended as a material of choice for CAD/CAM fabricated hybrid-abutment-crowns instead of zirconia in terms of retention durability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37875871
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03490-1
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-03490-1
pmc: PMC10594673
doi:
Substances chimiques
zirconium oxide
S38N85C5G0
Titanium
D1JT611TNE
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
784Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Am J Dent. 2006 Dec;19(6):333-6
pubmed: 17212073
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2020 Jan/Feb;40(1):31-37
pubmed: 31815970
Implant Dent. 2018 Oct;27(5):582-587
pubmed: 30134265
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2021 Jul-Sep;21(3):269-275
pubmed: 34380814
Oper Dent. 2016 Mar-Apr;41(2):171-8
pubmed: 26266652
Materials (Basel). 2018 Sep 11;11(9):
pubmed: 30208618
Dent Mater. 2013 Apr;29(4):419-26
pubmed: 23410552
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Apr 1;34(5):1091–1097
pubmed: 30934031
Int J Prosthodont. 2015 Sep-Oct;28(5):522-6
pubmed: 26340014
Int J Prosthodont. 2020 Sep/Oct;33(5):527-535
pubmed: 32956434
J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Aug;126(2):214-221
pubmed: 32921422
Dent Mater. 2009 Apr;25(4):494-9
pubmed: 19036423
Dent Mater. 2011 Jun;27(6):527-34
pubmed: 21371744
Materials (Basel). 2022 Oct 07;15(19):
pubmed: 36234309
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jan;30(1):90-98
pubmed: 30521070
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jan 24;16(3):
pubmed: 30678357
J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Jan;99(1):25-9
pubmed: 18182182
J Prosthodont. 2003 Jun;12(2):111-5
pubmed: 12964683
J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Feb;123(2):252-256
pubmed: 31202552
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Aug;120(2):214-219
pubmed: 29627210
J Dent (Shiraz). 2023 Mar;24(1):34-40
pubmed: 36864996
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Oct;17 Suppl 2:e511-9
pubmed: 25536361
Dent Mater. 2012 Dec;28(12):1215-20
pubmed: 23021964
J Adhes Dent. 2016;18(4):289-302
pubmed: 27222889
Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2021 Feb 25;29(1):22-34
pubmed: 32780569
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2016 Oct;37(9):611-617; quiz 618
pubmed: 27700128
Oper Dent. 2020 Jul 1;45(4):426-434
pubmed: 32053453
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Oct;23 Suppl 6:2-21
pubmed: 23062124
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2002 Jun;22(3):241-9
pubmed: 12186346
Dent Mater. 2007 Feb;23(2):159-64
pubmed: 16494935
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012 Nov-Dec;27(6):1448-55
pubmed: 23189296
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Aug;112(2):299-305
pubmed: 24461943