Literature DB >> 29243683

The comparison of cement- and screw-retained crowns from technical and biological points of view.

Aira Ragauskaitė1, Gediminas Žekonis, Juozas Žilinskas, Alvydas Gleiznys, Eglė Ivanauskienė, Darius Gleiznys.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to evaluate the most common complications in implant prosthodontics with porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns, to evaluate the influence of biomechanical properties on fractures and cracks of veneered porcelain, and to compare the effects of crowns with different connections on soft tissues.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search of literature in the English language between 2009 and 2015 was conducted using the following databases: Medline via PubMed, Science Direct, Wiley online library, Taylor& Francis, and Cochrane library. In total, 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria were found.
RESULTS: Four investigations showed that technical complications more often occurred in screw-retained prostheses, although two studies concluded that cement-retained crowns were also susceptible to technical complications. Two investigations showed that the deeper the abutment margin was subgingivally, the more excess cement was left in the peri-implant sulcus. Four studies concluded that cement-retained prostheses were more susceptible to biological complications, but two investigations also showed that biological complications were observed in tissues adjacent to screw-retained crowns.
CONCLUSIONS: The research of literature data for the last five years showed that screw-retained crowns demonstrated more failures such as porcelain cracks and fractures or screw loosening, while cement-retained crowns caused more severe biological complications such as peri-implant soft tissue inflammation or pathological bone resorption.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29243683

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stomatologija        ISSN: 1392-8589


  6 in total

1.  Stresses induced by one piece and two piece dental implants in All-on-4® implant supported prosthesis under simulated lateral occlusal loading: non linear finite element analysis study.

Authors:  Ahmed Mostafa Abdelfattah Mohamed; Mohamed Gamal Askar; Mahmoud El-Moutassim Bellah El Homossany
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-05-22       Impact factor: 3.747

Review 2.  A Systematic Review of Screw versus Cement-Retained Fixed Implant Supported Reconstructions.

Authors:  Mohamed Tharwat Hamed; Hisham Abdullah Mously; Saeed Khalid Alamoudi; Abou Bakr Hossam Hashem; Ghada Hussein Naguib
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2020-01-14

3.  The influence of two different cements on remaining cement excess in cement-retained implant-supported zirconia crowns. An in vitro study.

Authors:  Jazmin Hidalgo; Desirée Baghernejad; Anders Falk; Christel Larsson
Journal:  BDJ Open       Date:  2021-01-28

4.  Application of Semipermanent Cements and Conventional Cement with Modified Cementing Technique in Dental Implantology.

Authors:  Valentina Veselinović; Saša Marin; Zoran Tatić; Nataša Trtić; Olivera Dolić; Tijana Adamović; Radmila Arbutina; Miodrag Šćepanović; Aleksandar Todorović
Journal:  Acta Stomatol Croat       Date:  2021-12

5.  Impact of cement type and abutment height on pull-off force of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate crowns on titanium implant stock abutments: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Lisa Müller; Angelika Rauch; Daniel R Reissmann; Oliver Schierz
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-11-19       Impact factor: 2.757

Review 6.  Laboratory Fracture Resilience of Hybrid Abutments Used in Oral Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Luca Favasuli; Paulo S Mascarenhas; Paulo Mauricio
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2022-08-15
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.