Advertisement
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Comparison of the residual cement on custom computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing titanium and zirconia abutments: A preliminary cohort study

Published:September 11, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.06.013

      Abstract

      Statement of problem

      Clinical studies comparing the occurrence and quality of residual cement between custom zirconia and custom titanium abutments with subgingival margins are scarce.

      Purpose

      The purpose of this clinical study was to assess the difference in the amount of residual cement between custom zirconia and titanium abutments with a 1-mm subgingival margin.

      Material and methods

      Eighty participants were randomized to receive either a custom zirconia abutment with a bonded titanium insert or a custom titanium abutment with a 1-mm subgingival margin on a posterior bone-level implant. Monolithic lithium disilicate crowns with a screw-access hole were cemented to abutments randomly with either a resin-modified glass ionomer cement or a resin cement. After cementation, the crown-abutment assemblies were removed and photographed from the mesial, buccal, distal, and lingual of the specimen to record the residual cement. The length along the abutment margin of each aspect of the assembly was measured. The surface area of the residual cement (SA) and the surface area of the residual cement per unit length of margin (SA_P) were calculated. Results for the groups were compared with the Fisher exact test, the Friedman test, and the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05).

      Results

      The median (lower quartile, upper quartile) of SA and SA_P for the custom zirconia abutment with a bonded titanium insert was 1.9 (0.5, 3.9) mm2 and 0.086 (0.032, 0.02) mm2, respectively, and for the custom titanium abutment, the values were 2.9 (1.3, 5.1) mm2 and 0.138 (0.062, 0.239) mm2, respectively. No significant difference was found between the custom zirconia abutments with bonded titanium inserts and titanium abutments for SA (P=.075) and SA_P (P=.083) with the Mann-Whitney U test. No significant difference was found in residual cement between the 4 aspects of the abutment (SA: P=.852; SA_P: P=.954) with the Friedman test and between the 2 types of cement (SA: P=.447; SA_P: P=.878) with the Mann-Whitney U test.

      Conclusions

      A similar amount of subgingival residual cement was recorded around the abutment-crown assembly, regardless of the abutment material or cement type used.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Vindasiute E.
        • Puisys A.
        • Maslova N.
        • Linkeviciene L.
        • Peciuliene V.
        • Linkevicius T.
        Clinical factors influencing removal of the cement excess in implant-supported restorations.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: 771-778
        • Wittneben J.G.
        • Joda T.
        • Weber H.P.
        • Bragger U.
        Screw retained vs. cement retained implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis.
        Periodontol 2000. 2017; 73: 141-151
        • Chee W.
        • Jivraj S.
        Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations.
        Br Dent J. 2006; 201: 501-507
        • Wilson Jr., T.G.
        The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study.
        J Periodontol. 2009; 80: 1388-1392
        • Korsch M.
        • Obst U.
        • Walther W.
        Cement-associated peri-implantitis: a retrospective clinical observational study of fixed implant-supported restorations using a methacrylate cement.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 25: 797-802
        • Korsch M.
        • Robra B.P.
        • Walther W.
        Cement-associated signs of inflammation: retrospective analysis of the effect of excess cement on peri-implant tissue.
        Int J Prosthodont. 2015; 28: 11-18
        • Woelber J.P.
        • Ratka-Krueger P.
        • Vach K.
        • Frisch E.
        Decementation rates and the peri-implant tissue status of implant-supported fixed restorations retained via zinc oxide cement: a retrospective 10-23-year study.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016; 18: 917-925
        • Hill E.E.
        • Lott J.
        A clinically focused discussion of luting materials.
        Aust Dent J. 2011; 56 Suppl 1: 67-76
        • Hill E.E.
        Dental cements for definitive luting: a review and practical clinical considerations.
        Dent Clin North Am. 2007; 51 (vi): 643-658
        • Akça K.
        • Iplikçioğlu H.
        • Cehreli M.C.
        Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17: 536-542
        • Schwarz S.
        • Schroder C.
        • Corcodel N.
        • Hassel A.J.
        • 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. 2012; 14 Suppl 1: e151-e158
        • Hsu K.W.
        • Wei P.C.
        • Chen Y.L.
        • Liou E.J.
        Retrospective and clinical evaluation of aftermarket CAD/CAM titanium abutments supporting posterior splinted prostheses and single crowns.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019; 34: 1161-1168
        • Wadhwani C.
        • Piñeyro A.
        Technique for controlling the cement for an implant crown.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 102: 57-58
        • Chee W.W.
        • Duncan J.
        • Afshar M.
        • Moshaverinia A.
        Evaluation of the amount of excess cement around the margins of cement-retained dental implant restorations: the effect of the cement application method.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 109: 216-221
        • Wadhwani C.
        • Pineyro A.
        • Hess T.
        • Zhang H.
        • Chung K.H.
        Effect of implant abutment modification on the extrusion of excess cement at the crown-abutment margin for cement-retained implant restorations.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26: 1241-1246
        • Zaugg L.K.
        • Zehnder I.
        • Rohr N.
        • Fischer J.
        • Zitzmann N.U.
        The effects of crown venting or pre-cementing of CAD/CAM-constructed all-ceramic crowns luted on YTZ implants on marginal cement excess.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29: 82-90
        • Agar J.R.
        • Cameron S.M.
        • Hughbanks J.C.
        • Parker M.H.
        Cement removal from restorations luted to titanium abutments with simulated subgingival margins.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 78: 43-47
        • Linkevicius T.
        • Vindasiute E.
        • Puisys A.
        • Peciuliene V.
        The influence of margin location on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant restorations.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22: 1379-1384
        • Linkevicius T.
        • Vindasiute E.
        • Puisys A.
        • Linkeviciene L.
        • Maslova N.
        • Puriene A.
        The influence of the cementation margin position on the amount of undetected cement. A prospective clinical study.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 71-76
        • Wasiluk G.
        • Chomik E.
        • Gehrke P.
        • Pietruska M.
        • Skurska A.
        • Pietruski J.
        Incidence of undetected cement on CAD/CAM monolithic zirconia crowns and customized CAD/CAM implant abutments. A prospective case series.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017; 28: 774-778
        • Sancho-Puchades M.
        • Crameri D.
        • Ozcan M.
        • Sailer I.
        • Jung R.E.
        • Hammerle C.H.F.
        • et al.
        The influence of the emergence profile on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant reconstructions.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017; 28: 1515-1522
        • McCracken M.
        Dental implant materials: commercially pure titanium and titanium alloys.
        J Prosthodont. 1999; 8: 40-43
        • Pjetursson B.E.
        • Bragger U.
        • Lang N.P.
        • Zwahlen M.
        Comparison of survival and complication rates of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant-supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs).
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18 Suppl 3: 97-113
        • van Brakel R.
        • Noordmans H.J.
        • Frenken J.
        • de Roode R.
        • de Wit G.C.
        • Cune M.S.
        The effect of zirconia and titanium implant abutments on light reflection of the supporting soft tissues.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22: 1172-1178
        • Czigola A.
        • Abram E.
        • Kovacs Z.I.
        • Marton K.
        • Hermann P.
        • Borbely J.
        Effects of substrate, ceramic thickness, translucency, and cement shade on the color of CAD/CAM lithium-disilicate crowns.
        J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019; 31: 457-464
        • Piconi C.
        • Maccauro G.
        Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial.
        Biomaterials. 1999; 20: 1-25
        • Ichikawa Y.
        • Akagawa Y.
        • Nikai H.
        • Tsuru H.
        Tissue compatibility and stability of a new zirconia ceramic in vivo.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 68: 322-326
        • Zembic A.
        • Sailer I.
        • Jung R.E.
        • Hammerle C.H.
        Randomized-controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for single-tooth implants in canine and posterior regions: 3-year results.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20: 802-808
        • Salihoglu U.
        • Boynuegri D.
        • Engin D.
        • Duman A.N.
        • Gokalp P.
        • Balos K.
        Bacterial adhesion and colonization differences between zirconium oxide and titanium alloys: an in vivo human study.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26: 101-107
        • Al-Radha A.S.
        • Dymock D.
        • Younes C.
        • O'Sullivan D.
        Surface properties of titanium and zirconia dental implant materials and their effect on bacterial adhesion.
        J Dent. 2012; 40: 146-153
        • O'Keefe K.L.
        • Miller B.H.
        • Powers J.M.
        In vitro tensile bond strength of adhesive cements to new post materials.
        Int J Prosthodont. 2000; 13: 47-51
        • Dahiya A.
        • Baba N.Z.
        • Kattadiyil M.T.
        • Goodacre C.J.
        • Mann A.
        Comparison of the effects of cement removal from zirconia and titanium abutments: an in vitro study.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 121: 504-509
        • Pow E.H.
        • McMillan A.S.
        A modified implant healing abutment to optimize soft tissue contours: a case report.
        Implant Dent. 2004; 13: 297-300
        • Stumpel L.J.
        • Wadhwani C.
        Development and capture of soft tissue contours at time of implant placement.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117: 709-713
        • Doliveux S.
        • Jamjoom F.Z.
        • Nadra M.
        • Gallucci G.O.
        • Hamilton A.
        Fabrication technique for a custom implant emergence profile on 3D printed casts.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 123: 571-575
        • Ntounis A.
        • Petropoulou A.
        A technique for managing and accurate registration of periimplant soft tissues.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 104: 276-279
        • Koo T.K.
        • Li M.Y.
        A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research.
        J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15: 155-163
        • Wadhwani C.
        • Hess T.
        • Piñeyro A.
        • Opler R.
        • Chung K.-H.
        Cement application techniques in luting implant-supported crowns: a quantitative and qualitative survey.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012; 27: 859-864
        • Augusti D.
        • Augusti G.
        • Re D.
        Undetected excess cement at marginal areas of zirconia crown copings: in vitro analysis of two luting agents and their influence on retention.
        Int J Prosthodont. 2020; 33: 202-211