File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Marginal fit of cemented and screw-retained crowns incorporated on the Straumann (ITI)® dental implant system: An in vitro study

TitleMarginal fit of cemented and screw-retained crowns incorporated on the Straumann (ITI)® dental implant system: An in vitro study
Authors
Issue Date2009
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLR
Citation
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2009, v. 20 n. 1, p. 79-86 How to Cite?
AbstractAim: The aim of this study was to assess the marginal fit of crowns on the Straumann (ITI)® Dental Implant System with special consideration of different casting dental materials. Material and methods: Sixty porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns were fabricated: 18 crowns on standard cone abutments with an impression cylinder, partially prefabricated analogs, no coping and screw-retained (A); 18 crowns on solid abutments without an impression device, no analogs, no coping and cemented (B); and 18 crowns on solid abutments using an impression transfer cap, an analog with a shoulder, no coping and cemented (C). In each group, six crowns were made on epoxy mastercasts (Bluestar®), six on synthetic plaster (Moldasynt ®) and six on super hard stone (Fujirock®). Six additional crowns were fabricated with the transversal screw retention system onto the Octa® system with impression transfer caps, metal analogs, gold copings and screw-retained (D). Impregum® was used as impression material. Crowns of B and C were cemented with KetacCem ®. Crowns of A and D were fixed with an occlusal screw torqued at 15 N cm. Crowns were embedded, cut and polished. Under a light microscope using a magnification of × 100, the distance between the crown margin (CM) and the shoulder (marginal gap, MG) and the distance between the CM and the end of the shoulder (crown length, CL) was measured. Results: MGs were 15.4±13.2 μm (A), 21.2±23.1 μm (B), 11±12.1 μm (C) and 10.4±9.3 μm (D). No statistically significantly differences using either of the casting materials were observed. CLs were -21.3±24.8 μm (A), 3±28.9 μm (B), 0.5±22 μm (C) and 0.1±15.8 μm (D). Crowns were shorter on synthetic casting materials compared with stone casts (P<0.005). Conclusions: CMs fit precisely with both cemented and screw-retained versions as well as when using no, partial or full analogs. © 2009 Blackwell Munksgaard.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154555
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.464
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.427
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTosches, NAen_US
dc.contributor.authorBrägger, Uen_US
dc.contributor.authorLang, NPen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:26:09Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:26:09Z-
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research, 2009, v. 20 n. 1, p. 79-86en_US
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154555-
dc.description.abstractAim: The aim of this study was to assess the marginal fit of crowns on the Straumann (ITI)® Dental Implant System with special consideration of different casting dental materials. Material and methods: Sixty porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns were fabricated: 18 crowns on standard cone abutments with an impression cylinder, partially prefabricated analogs, no coping and screw-retained (A); 18 crowns on solid abutments without an impression device, no analogs, no coping and cemented (B); and 18 crowns on solid abutments using an impression transfer cap, an analog with a shoulder, no coping and cemented (C). In each group, six crowns were made on epoxy mastercasts (Bluestar®), six on synthetic plaster (Moldasynt ®) and six on super hard stone (Fujirock®). Six additional crowns were fabricated with the transversal screw retention system onto the Octa® system with impression transfer caps, metal analogs, gold copings and screw-retained (D). Impregum® was used as impression material. Crowns of B and C were cemented with KetacCem ®. Crowns of A and D were fixed with an occlusal screw torqued at 15 N cm. Crowns were embedded, cut and polished. Under a light microscope using a magnification of × 100, the distance between the crown margin (CM) and the shoulder (marginal gap, MG) and the distance between the CM and the end of the shoulder (crown length, CL) was measured. Results: MGs were 15.4±13.2 μm (A), 21.2±23.1 μm (B), 11±12.1 μm (C) and 10.4±9.3 μm (D). No statistically significantly differences using either of the casting materials were observed. CLs were -21.3±24.8 μm (A), 3±28.9 μm (B), 0.5±22 μm (C) and 0.1±15.8 μm (D). Crowns were shorter on synthetic casting materials compared with stone casts (P<0.005). Conclusions: CMs fit precisely with both cemented and screw-retained versions as well as when using no, partial or full analogs. © 2009 Blackwell Munksgaard.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLRen_US
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Implants Researchen_US
dc.subject.meshCementationen_US
dc.subject.meshCrownsen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Abutmentsen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Implantsen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Impression Techniqueen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Marginal Adaptationen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Modelsen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Prosthesis Retention - Instrumentation - Methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshDental Prosthesis, Implant-Supporteden_US
dc.subject.meshGlass Ionomer Cementsen_US
dc.subject.meshMagnesium Oxideen_US
dc.subject.meshMetal Ceramic Alloysen_US
dc.subject.meshPolycarboxylate Cementen_US
dc.subject.meshProsthesis Fittingen_US
dc.subject.meshTorqueen_US
dc.subject.meshZinc Oxideen_US
dc.titleMarginal fit of cemented and screw-retained crowns incorporated on the Straumann (ITI)® dental implant system: An in vitro studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailLang, NP:nplang@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityLang, NP=rp00031en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01591.xen_US
dc.identifier.pmid19126111-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-58149171599en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros165340-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-58149171599&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume20en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage79en_US
dc.identifier.epage86en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000262129300012-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTosches, NA=25931777500en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBrägger, U=7005538598en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLang, NP=7201577367en_US
dc.identifier.citeulike3846861-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats