Retrievability of implant-supported crowns when using three different cements: a controlled clinical trial

Worni, Andreas; Gholami, Hadi; Marchand, Laurent; Katsoulis, Joannis; Mericske, Regina; Enkling, Norbert (2015). Retrievability of implant-supported crowns when using three different cements: a controlled clinical trial. International journal of prosthodontics, 28(1), pp. 22-29. Quintessence Publ. 10.11607/ijp.4119

Full text not available from this repository.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the removal of implant-supported crowns retained by three different cements using an air-accelerated crown remover and to evaluate the patients' response to the procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This controlled clinical trial was conducted with 21 patients (10 women, 11 men; mean age: 51 ± 10.2 years) who had received a total of 74 implants (all placed in the posterior zone of the mandible). Four months after implant surgery, the crowns were cemented on standard titanium abutments of different heights. Three different cements (two temporary: Harvard TEMP and Improv; and one definitive: Durelon) were used and randomly assigned to the patients. Eight months later, one blinded investigator removed all crowns. The number of activations of the instrument (CORONAflex, KaVo) required for crown removal was recorded. The patients completed a questionnaire retrospectively to determine the impact of the procedure and to gauge their subjective perception. A linear regression model and descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

All crowns could be retrieved without any technical complications or damage. Both abutment height (P = .019) and cement type (P = .004) had a significant effect on the number of activations, but the type of cement was more important. An increased total number of activations had no or only a weak correlation to the patients' perception of concussion, noise, pain, and unwillingness to use the device.

CONCLUSIONS

Cemented implant crowns can be removed, and the application of an air-accelerated device is a practicable method. A type of cement with appropriate retention force has to be selected. The impact on the patients' subjective perception should be taken into account.

Item Type:	Journal Article (Original Article)
Division/Institute:	04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine 04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology
UniBE Contributor:	Worni, Andreas, Gholami, Hadi, Katsoulis, Joannis, Mericske, Regina, Enkling, Norbert
Subjects:	600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
ISSN:	0893-2174
Publisher:	Quintessence Publ.
Language:	English
Submitter:	Eveline Carmen Schuler
Date Deposited:	29 Mar 2016 10:31
Last Modified:	05 Dec 2022 14:53
Publisher DOI:	10.11607/ijp.4119
PubMed ID:	25588168
URI:	https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/77755