水泥类型对氧化锆种植体修复体去除质量的影响

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE International Journal of Prosthodontics Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.11607/ijp.7088
Egle Vindasiute-Narbute, Algirdas Puisys, Rolandas Andrijauskas, Gaivile Pileicikiene, Dominyka Malinauskaite, Tomas Linkevicius
{"title":"水泥类型对氧化锆种植体修复体去除质量的影响","authors":"Egle Vindasiute-Narbute,&nbsp;Algirdas Puisys,&nbsp;Rolandas Andrijauskas,&nbsp;Gaivile Pileicikiene,&nbsp;Dominyka Malinauskaite,&nbsp;Tomas Linkevicius","doi":"10.11607/ijp.7088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess excess cement removal after cementation of implant-supported cementretained restorations using different cements.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A dental model with soft tissue imitation, 20 individual zirconium oxide abutments, and 20 zirconium oxide crowns were fabricated. Half of the restorations were cemented using resin cement (RX) and the other half with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (GC). After cement cleaning, each crown-abutment unit was removed from the model, photographed, and analyzed from 4 surfaces, resulting in a final sample size of 80 measurements. Radiographic examination and the computerized planimetric method in Adobe Photoshop were used to determine the amount of the cement left and to evaluate the ratio between the area of cement residue and the whole crown-abutment surface. The significance was set to .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GC resulted in 7.4% more cement residue on all surfaces (P < .05) than RX. The P value on three of the surfaces (all except mesial) was < .05, meaning that the data were statistically significantly different between groups and surfaces. Absolute removal of the cement was impossible in all cases (100%), and in 95% of the cases, cement remnants could not be detected radiographically.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>More undetected cement remains when using resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. It was impossible to remove excess of both types of cements completely. Most of the cement remains on the distal surface. Radiographic examination could not be considered as a reliable method to identify excess cement.</p>","PeriodicalId":50292,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Prosthodontics","volume":"36 3","pages":"315–322"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of Cement Type on its Quality of Removal from Zirconium Oxide Implant-Supported Restorations\",\"authors\":\"Egle Vindasiute-Narbute,&nbsp;Algirdas Puisys,&nbsp;Rolandas Andrijauskas,&nbsp;Gaivile Pileicikiene,&nbsp;Dominyka Malinauskaite,&nbsp;Tomas Linkevicius\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/ijp.7088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess excess cement removal after cementation of implant-supported cementretained restorations using different cements.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A dental model with soft tissue imitation, 20 individual zirconium oxide abutments, and 20 zirconium oxide crowns were fabricated. Half of the restorations were cemented using resin cement (RX) and the other half with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (GC). After cement cleaning, each crown-abutment unit was removed from the model, photographed, and analyzed from 4 surfaces, resulting in a final sample size of 80 measurements. Radiographic examination and the computerized planimetric method in Adobe Photoshop were used to determine the amount of the cement left and to evaluate the ratio between the area of cement residue and the whole crown-abutment surface. The significance was set to .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GC resulted in 7.4% more cement residue on all surfaces (P < .05) than RX. The P value on three of the surfaces (all except mesial) was < .05, meaning that the data were statistically significantly different between groups and surfaces. Absolute removal of the cement was impossible in all cases (100%), and in 95% of the cases, cement remnants could not be detected radiographically.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>More undetected cement remains when using resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. It was impossible to remove excess of both types of cements completely. Most of the cement remains on the distal surface. Radiographic examination could not be considered as a reliable method to identify excess cement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50292,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Prosthodontics\",\"volume\":\"36 3\",\"pages\":\"315–322\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Prosthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.7088\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.7088","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:评估不同类型骨水泥对种植体支撑骨水泥修复体的骨水泥去除效果。材料与方法:制作1个软组织模拟牙模型、20个氧化锆基牙、20个氧化锆冠。一半的修复体使用树脂水泥(RX),另一半使用树脂改性玻璃离子水泥(GC)。水泥清洗后,从模型中取出每个冠-基台单元,从4个表面拍摄和分析,最终得到80个测量样本。采用影像学检查和adobephotoshop中的计算机平面测量法确定剩余水泥量,并评估水泥残留面积与整个冠-基台表面的比值。显著性设为0.05。结果:与RX相比,GC的各表面水泥残留量增加了7.4% (P < 0.05)。三个面(除中位面外)P值均< 0.05,说明组间、面间数据差异有统计学意义。所有病例(100%)都不可能完全清除骨水泥,95%的病例无法通过影像学检查检测到骨水泥残留。结论:树脂改性玻璃离聚体水泥残留较多。完全去除这两种水泥的过量是不可能的。大部分骨水泥停留在远端表面。影像学检查不能作为鉴别骨水泥过量的可靠方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Influence of Cement Type on its Quality of Removal from Zirconium Oxide Implant-Supported Restorations

Purpose: To assess excess cement removal after cementation of implant-supported cementretained restorations using different cements.

Materials and methods: A dental model with soft tissue imitation, 20 individual zirconium oxide abutments, and 20 zirconium oxide crowns were fabricated. Half of the restorations were cemented using resin cement (RX) and the other half with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (GC). After cement cleaning, each crown-abutment unit was removed from the model, photographed, and analyzed from 4 surfaces, resulting in a final sample size of 80 measurements. Radiographic examination and the computerized planimetric method in Adobe Photoshop were used to determine the amount of the cement left and to evaluate the ratio between the area of cement residue and the whole crown-abutment surface. The significance was set to .05.

Results: GC resulted in 7.4% more cement residue on all surfaces (P < .05) than RX. The P value on three of the surfaces (all except mesial) was < .05, meaning that the data were statistically significantly different between groups and surfaces. Absolute removal of the cement was impossible in all cases (100%), and in 95% of the cases, cement remnants could not be detected radiographically.

Conclusion: More undetected cement remains when using resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. It was impossible to remove excess of both types of cements completely. Most of the cement remains on the distal surface. Radiographic examination could not be considered as a reliable method to identify excess cement.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Prosthodontics
International Journal of Prosthodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
82
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the European Association for Osseointegration (EAO), the International College of Prosthodontists (ICP), the German Society of Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science (DGPro), and the Italian Academy of Prosthetic Dentistry (AIOP) Prosthodontics demands a clinical research emphasis on patient- and dentist-mediated concerns in the management of oral rehabilitation needs. It is about making and implementing the best clinical decisions to enhance patients'' quality of life via applied biologic architecture - a role that far exceeds that of traditional prosthetic dentistry, with its emphasis on materials and techniques. The International Journal of Prosthodontics is dedicated to exploring and developing this conceptual shift in the role of today''s prosthodontist, clinician, and educator alike. The editorial board is composed of a distinguished team of leading international scholars.
期刊最新文献
A Comparison of Abutment Screw Loosening in 24-Degree Angulation-Correcting and Straight Implants: An In Vitro Study. Analysis of Topography, Flexural Strength, and Microstructure of a Lithium Disilicate Glass- Ceramic after Surface Finishing. Aging and Fracture Resistance of Screw-Retained Implant-Supported Molar Crowns Fabricated from Lithium Disilicate Containing Virgilite. Comparison Between Interocclusal Registration Using Silicone Bite Registration Material and Intraoral Scanner on Clenching Strength. Satisfaction with Labial Reinforcement of Custom-Made Mouthguards Among a Cohort of Rugby Union Players: A Randomized Crossover Trial.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
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:481959085
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