Cargando…

Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the retention strength of five cement types commonly used in implant-retained fixed partial dentures, before and after compressive cyclic loading. In five solid abutments screwed to 5 implant analogs, 50 metal Cr-Ni alloy copings were cemented wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alvarez-Arenal, Angel, Gonzalez-Gonzalez, Ignacio, deLlanos-Lanchares, Hector, Brizuela-Velasco, Aritza, Pinés-Hueso, Javier, Ellakuria-Echebarria, Joseba
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5086349/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27822468
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2107027
_version_ 1782463720368111616
author Alvarez-Arenal, Angel
Gonzalez-Gonzalez, Ignacio
deLlanos-Lanchares, Hector
Brizuela-Velasco, Aritza
Pinés-Hueso, Javier
Ellakuria-Echebarria, Joseba
author_facet Alvarez-Arenal, Angel
Gonzalez-Gonzalez, Ignacio
deLlanos-Lanchares, Hector
Brizuela-Velasco, Aritza
Pinés-Hueso, Javier
Ellakuria-Echebarria, Joseba
author_sort Alvarez-Arenal, Angel
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the retention strength of five cement types commonly used in implant-retained fixed partial dentures, before and after compressive cyclic loading. In five solid abutments screwed to 5 implant analogs, 50 metal Cr-Ni alloy copings were cemented with five luting agents: resin-modified glass ionomer (RmGI), resin composite (RC), glass ionomer (GI), resin urethane-based (RUB), and compomer cement (CC). Two tensile tests were conducted with a universal testing machine, one after the first luting of the copings and the other after 100,000 cycles of 100 N loading at 0.72 Hz. The one way ANOVA test was applied for the statistical analysis using the post hoc Tukey test when required. Before and after applying the compressive load, RmGI and RC cement types showed the greatest retention strength. After compressive loading, RUB cement showed the highest percentage loss of retention (64.45%). GI cement recorded the lowest retention strength (50.35 N) and the resin composite cement recorded the highest (352.02 N). The type of cement influences the retention loss. The clinician should give preference to lower retention strength cement (RUB, CC, and GI) if he envisages any complications and a high retention strength one (RmGI, RC) for a specific clinical situation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5086349
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50863492016-11-07 Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses Alvarez-Arenal, Angel Gonzalez-Gonzalez, Ignacio deLlanos-Lanchares, Hector Brizuela-Velasco, Aritza Pinés-Hueso, Javier Ellakuria-Echebarria, Joseba Biomed Res Int Research Article The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the retention strength of five cement types commonly used in implant-retained fixed partial dentures, before and after compressive cyclic loading. In five solid abutments screwed to 5 implant analogs, 50 metal Cr-Ni alloy copings were cemented with five luting agents: resin-modified glass ionomer (RmGI), resin composite (RC), glass ionomer (GI), resin urethane-based (RUB), and compomer cement (CC). Two tensile tests were conducted with a universal testing machine, one after the first luting of the copings and the other after 100,000 cycles of 100 N loading at 0.72 Hz. The one way ANOVA test was applied for the statistical analysis using the post hoc Tukey test when required. Before and after applying the compressive load, RmGI and RC cement types showed the greatest retention strength. After compressive loading, RUB cement showed the highest percentage loss of retention (64.45%). GI cement recorded the lowest retention strength (50.35 N) and the resin composite cement recorded the highest (352.02 N). The type of cement influences the retention loss. The clinician should give preference to lower retention strength cement (RUB, CC, and GI) if he envisages any complications and a high retention strength one (RmGI, RC) for a specific clinical situation. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5086349/ /pubmed/27822468 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2107027 Text en Copyright © 2016 Angel Alvarez-Arenal et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Alvarez-Arenal, Angel
Gonzalez-Gonzalez, Ignacio
deLlanos-Lanchares, Hector
Brizuela-Velasco, Aritza
Pinés-Hueso, Javier
Ellakuria-Echebarria, Joseba
Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses
title Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses
title_full Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses
title_fullStr Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses
title_full_unstemmed Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses
title_short Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses
title_sort retention strength after compressive cyclic loading of five luting agents used in implant-supported prostheses
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5086349/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27822468
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2107027
work_keys_str_mv AT alvarezarenalangel retentionstrengthaftercompressivecyclicloadingoffivelutingagentsusedinimplantsupportedprostheses
AT gonzalezgonzalezignacio retentionstrengthaftercompressivecyclicloadingoffivelutingagentsusedinimplantsupportedprostheses
AT dellanoslanchareshector retentionstrengthaftercompressivecyclicloadingoffivelutingagentsusedinimplantsupportedprostheses
AT brizuelavelascoaritza retentionstrengthaftercompressivecyclicloadingoffivelutingagentsusedinimplantsupportedprostheses
AT pineshuesojavier retentionstrengthaftercompressivecyclicloadingoffivelutingagentsusedinimplantsupportedprostheses
AT ellakuriaechebarriajoseba retentionstrengthaftercompressivecyclicloadingoffivelutingagentsusedinimplantsupportedprostheses