Evaluation of radiopacity of cements used in implant-supported prosthesis by indirect digital radiography: an in-vitro study.

IF 1.8 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL European Journal of Translational Myology Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.4081/ejtm.2023.11940
Mahla Esfahanian, Amin Mahdavi Asl
{"title":"Evaluation of radiopacity of cements used in implant-supported prosthesis by indirect digital radiography: an <i>in-vitro</i> study.","authors":"Mahla Esfahanian, Amin Mahdavi Asl","doi":"10.4081/ejtm.2023.11940","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In order to help dentists in choosing the right type of cement for implant-based prostheses, the radiopacity of commonly used cements available in the market was investigated by digital radiography with PSP sensor. In the present study, temporary cements of TempBond (Kerr, Germany), TempBond clear (Kerr, Germany), Dycal (Dentsply, USA) and permanent cements of Multilink N (Ivoclar, Brazil), Panavia F 2.0 (Kurrary, Japan), Fuji plus (GC, Japan), RelyX (3M, USA), Durelon (3M, USA) were used. Four pill-like samples with 0.5 mm and 1 mm thickness and 5 mm in diameter inside the silicon index as recommended by the manufacturer were prepared for each cement. Aluminum step wedge (99% aluminum alloy) was used as control. Using digital radiography, cement and aluminum step wedge samples were radiographed. The images of cement tablets were measured by digital radiography using DFW software to check their radiopacity values. Bonferroni test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for comparison of cements. The highest radiopacity between the group of 1 and 0.5 mm thickness was related to Glass ionomer Fujiplus GC (2407±45.99) and TempBond (137.21±22.46) cement, respectively. Whereas, the lowest radiopacity among the groups was related to Clear cement. The difference between the mean radiopacities among the studied groups was statistically significant (p<0.001). Based on the results, among the available cements, Glass ionomer Fujiplus GC and TempBond cement are the most efficient for 1 and 0.5 mm thickness, respectively, and Clear cement is the least efficient cement in both groups in terms of radiopacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":46459,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Translational Myology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10811638/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Translational Myology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/ejtm.2023.11940","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In order to help dentists in choosing the right type of cement for implant-based prostheses, the radiopacity of commonly used cements available in the market was investigated by digital radiography with PSP sensor. In the present study, temporary cements of TempBond (Kerr, Germany), TempBond clear (Kerr, Germany), Dycal (Dentsply, USA) and permanent cements of Multilink N (Ivoclar, Brazil), Panavia F 2.0 (Kurrary, Japan), Fuji plus (GC, Japan), RelyX (3M, USA), Durelon (3M, USA) were used. Four pill-like samples with 0.5 mm and 1 mm thickness and 5 mm in diameter inside the silicon index as recommended by the manufacturer were prepared for each cement. Aluminum step wedge (99% aluminum alloy) was used as control. Using digital radiography, cement and aluminum step wedge samples were radiographed. The images of cement tablets were measured by digital radiography using DFW software to check their radiopacity values. Bonferroni test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for comparison of cements. The highest radiopacity between the group of 1 and 0.5 mm thickness was related to Glass ionomer Fujiplus GC (2407±45.99) and TempBond (137.21±22.46) cement, respectively. Whereas, the lowest radiopacity among the groups was related to Clear cement. The difference between the mean radiopacities among the studied groups was statistically significant (p<0.001). Based on the results, among the available cements, Glass ionomer Fujiplus GC and TempBond cement are the most efficient for 1 and 0.5 mm thickness, respectively, and Clear cement is the least efficient cement in both groups in terms of radiopacity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
间接数字x线摄影评估种植体支撑假体中骨水泥的放射不透明度:一项体外研究。
为了帮助牙医在种植体修复中选择合适类型的骨水泥,采用PSP传感器的数字x线摄影技术对市场上常用骨水泥的放射不透明度进行了研究。本研究使用TempBond(德国Kerr)、TempBond clear(德国Kerr)、Dycal(美国Dentsply)的临时水泥,以及Multilink N(巴西Ivoclar)、Panavia F 2.0(日本kurary)、Fuji plus(日本GC)、RelyX(美国3M)、Durelon(美国3M)的永久水泥。每种水泥分别制备4个丸状样品,厚度分别为0.5 mm和1mm,直径在制造商推荐的硅指数内为5mm。以铝阶梯楔(99%铝合金)为对照。采用数字x线摄影,对水泥和铝台阶楔样品进行x线摄影。采用DFW软件对水泥片进行数字放射线成像,检查其透光度值。采用Bonferroni检验和Mann-Whitney U检验进行骨水泥的比较。玻璃离子Fujiplus GC(2407±45.99)和TempBond(137.21±22.46)水泥在1 ~ 0.5 mm厚度组间的放射不透明度最高。然而,各组中最低的放射不透性与Clear水泥有关。各研究组平均放射浊度差异有统计学意义(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Translational Myology
European Journal of Translational Myology MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
27.30%
发文量
74
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
The role of SP1 (rs1800012) in anterior cruciate ligament injuries: updated meta-analysis. Postoperative Rehabilitation Strategies and Facial Nerve Recovery after Cerebellopontine Angle Tumor Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Effects of a 12-week time-of-day-specific concurrent resistance-aerobic training on muscle strength, bone mass and functional performance in elderly women. Effect of foot fixation on muscle activation and power output during the Wingate test in cyclists. Does GABA supplementation modulate muscle cytokine expression and inflammatory status in aged rats?.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1