Evaluation of tensile bond strength of two different cements used for luting zirconia coping to one-piece zirconia implant - An in vitro study.

IF 1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Vishal Singh Bhadouria, Omkar Krishna Shetty, Reshu Sanan, Bhupender Kumar Yadav, Pankaj Kumar Ritwal, Kunal Nischal
{"title":"Evaluation of tensile bond strength of two different cements used for luting zirconia coping to one-piece zirconia implant - An in vitro study.","authors":"Vishal Singh Bhadouria, Omkar Krishna Shetty, Reshu Sanan, Bhupender Kumar Yadav, Pankaj Kumar Ritwal, Kunal Nischal","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_267_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The purpose of this in vitro study was the evaluation of the tensile bond strength of two different cements used for luting zirconia coping to one-piece zirconia implant.</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>The study was designed in an in vitro study setting.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A one-piece zirconia implant was scanned on laboratory scanner, and thirty zirconia implants were milled by computer aided manufacturing (CAM). Subsequently, the abutment surface of each zirconia implants were scanned in laboratory scanner and coping with a hole was designed by computer-aided designing software, which was used for milling by computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). After various surface treatments of abutment and intaglio surface of coping, fifteen sets were cemented by glass ionomer cement (Group I) and the other fifteen sets by adhesive resin cement (Group II). All thirty samples after thermocycling were dried and pulled out in a universal testing machine, and tensile retention force is noted in pounds per square inch (psi).</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>Values for tensile retention force were tabulated for both the groups. Mean and standard deviation are calculated. Independent t-value and P value were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The least tensile retention force was reported in Group I (165.86 ± 25.74 psi). Maximum tensile retention force was received for Group II (396.81 ± 78.32 psi). Independent t-test was applied from which t-value calculated was 10.85 and P value obtained was 0.001, which means that there exists a very high difference in tensile bond strength of cement in Group I and Group II.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Better tensile retention forces were observed in samples cemented with adhesive resin cement when compared to samples cemented with glass ionomer cement.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"24 4","pages":"374-380"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11614133/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_267_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this in vitro study was the evaluation of the tensile bond strength of two different cements used for luting zirconia coping to one-piece zirconia implant.

Settings and design: The study was designed in an in vitro study setting.

Materials and methods: A one-piece zirconia implant was scanned on laboratory scanner, and thirty zirconia implants were milled by computer aided manufacturing (CAM). Subsequently, the abutment surface of each zirconia implants were scanned in laboratory scanner and coping with a hole was designed by computer-aided designing software, which was used for milling by computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). After various surface treatments of abutment and intaglio surface of coping, fifteen sets were cemented by glass ionomer cement (Group I) and the other fifteen sets by adhesive resin cement (Group II). All thirty samples after thermocycling were dried and pulled out in a universal testing machine, and tensile retention force is noted in pounds per square inch (psi).

Statistical analysis used: Values for tensile retention force were tabulated for both the groups. Mean and standard deviation are calculated. Independent t-value and P value were calculated.

Results: The least tensile retention force was reported in Group I (165.86 ± 25.74 psi). Maximum tensile retention force was received for Group II (396.81 ± 78.32 psi). Independent t-test was applied from which t-value calculated was 10.85 and P value obtained was 0.001, which means that there exists a very high difference in tensile bond strength of cement in Group I and Group II.

Conclusions: Better tensile retention forces were observed in samples cemented with adhesive resin cement when compared to samples cemented with glass ionomer cement.

评估两种不同的胶结剂用于氧化锆覆盖到一体式氧化锆种植体的拉伸结合强度-一项体外研究。
目的:评价两种不同粘结剂在一体式氧化锆种植体上的抗拉结合强度。环境和设计:该研究是在体外研究环境中设计的。材料与方法:在实验室扫描仪上对一件式氧化锆种植体进行扫描,并用计算机辅助制造(CAM)对30个氧化锆种植体进行铣削。随后,在实验室扫描仪上对每个氧化锆种植体的基牙表面进行扫描,并通过计算机辅助设计软件设计一个孔,然后通过计算机辅助制造(CAM)进行铣削。在对基台和顶凹面进行各种表面处理后,15组采用玻璃离子水门汀(I组),其余15组采用粘接树脂水门汀(II组)。热循环后的所有30个样品在通用试验机中干燥并拉出,拉伸保持力以磅每平方英寸(psi)表示。采用统计学分析:将两组的拉伸保持力数值制成表格。计算平均值和标准差。计算独立的t值和P值。结果:ⅰ组拉伸力最小(165.86±25.74 psi)。组II的最大拉伸保持力为396.81±78.32 psi。采用独立t检验,计算出的t值为10.85,得到的P值为0.001,说明I组和II组水泥的抗拉粘结强度存在很大差异。结论:与玻璃离子水门合剂相比,胶粘剂树脂水门合剂具有更好的拉伸保持力。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信