Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Dept. of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

2 Dept. of Prosthodontics, Biomaterials Research Center, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

Abstract

Statement of the Problem: Retrieval of cement-retained implant-supported restorations is challenging in cases of screw loosening or periodontal problems.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the screw access hole on the fracture resistance of zirconia-based cement-retained restorations with and without an access opening.
Materials and Method: In this in vitro study thirty-three cement-retained implant-supported zirconia-based molar crowns were fabricated and divided into 3 groups (n=11). As the control group, group 1 consisted of conventional cement-retained crowns. Group 2 comprised conventional cement-retained crowns in which a hole was created in the location of the screw. Group 3 consisted of cement-retained crowns in which a ledge was created in the location of the screw access channel. The specimens were cemented to their abutments and their access openings were filled with composite resin. A compressive load was applied to the specimens using a universal testing machine until they fractured. The mean fracture resistance values of the samples were compared by using the one-way ANOVA and Tamhane post-hoc test (a=0.05).
Results: The mean fracture resistance values were 1270.18± 12.67 N in group 1 (the control group), 960.09±210.67 N in group 2 (conventional), and 1357.81±361.68 N in group 3 (the special design). The fracture resistance value was higher in the special design group than that of the conventional design (p = 0.018) and the fracture resistance value of the conventional design group was less than that of the control group (p = 0.042). No statistically significant difference was detected between the control group and the special design group in fracture resistance values.
Conclusion: Preparing a screw access hole in cement-retained implant-supported zirconia-based crowns decreased the fracture resistance of the restoration. Designing a ledge in the zirconia framework around the access hole may increase the fracture resistance of the restoration.

Keywords

[1]  Papaspyridakos P, BarizanBordin T, Kim YJ, DeFuria C, Pagni CE, Chochlidakis K, et al. Implant survival rates and biologic complications with implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses: A retrospective study with up to 12-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29: 881-893.

[2]  Oliva JOliva XOliva JD. Five-year success rate of 831 consecutively placed Zirconia dental implants in humans: a comparison of three different rough surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010; 25: 336-344.

[3]  Gautam C, Joyner J, Gautam A, Rao J, Vajtai R. Zirconia based dental ceramics: structure, mechanical properties, biocompatibility and applications. Dalton Trans. 2016; 45: 19194-19215.

[4]  Khaledi AAR, Vojdani M, Farzin M, Pirouzi S, Orandi S. The Effect of Sintering Time on the Marginal Fit of Zirconia Copings. J Prosthodont. 2019; 28: 285-289.

[5]  Torabi Ardakani M, Giti R, Taghva M, Javanmardi S. Effect of a zirconia primer on push-out bond strength of zirconia ceramic posts to root canal dentin. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 398-402.

[6]  Sailer I, Mühlemann S, Zwahlen M, Hämmerle CH, Schneider D. Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23: 163-201.

[7]  Chee W, Felton DA, Johnson PF, Sullivan DY. Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: which is better? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14: 137-141.

[8]  Torrado E, Ercoli C, Al Mardini M, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L. A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cementretained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 91: 532-537.

[9]  Zarone F, Sorrentino R, Traini T, Di lorio D, Caputi S. Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw- versus cement-retained porcelain fused to metal single crowns: SEM fractographic analysis. Dent Mater. 2007; 23: 296-301.

[10]          Guichet DL, Caputo AA, Choi H, Sorensen JA. Passivity of fit and marginal opening in screw- or cementretained implant fixed partial denture designs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000; 15: 239-246.

[11]          Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cementretained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003; 18: 719-728.

[12]          Rajan M, Gunaseelan R. Fabrication of a cement- and screw-retained implant prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 92: 578-580.

[13]          Farina AP, Spazzin AO, Pantoja JM, Consani RL, Mesquita MF. An in vitro comparison of joint stability of implant-supported fixed prosthetic suprastructures retained with different prosthetic screws and levels of fit under masticatory simulation conditions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012; 27: 833-838.

[14]          McGlumphy EA, Mendel DA, Holloway JA. Implant screw mechanics. Dent Clin North Am. 1998; 42: 71-89.

[15]          Pietrabissa R, Gionso L, Quaglini V, Martino ED, Simion M. An in vitro study on compensation of mismatch of screw versus cement-retained implant supported fixed prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000; 11: 448-457.

[16]          Figueras-Alvarez O, Cedeño R, Cano-Batalla J Cabratosa-Termes J. A method for registering the abutment screw position of cement-retained implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 104: 60-62.

[17]          Doerr J. Simplified technique for retrieving cemented implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2002; 88: 352-353.

[18]          Daher T, Morgano SM. The use of digital photographs to locate implant abutment screws for implant-supported cement-retained restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 100: 238-239.

[19]          Clausen GF. The lingual locking screw for implant-retained restorations--aesthetics and retrievability. Aust Prosthodont J. 1995; 9: 17-20.

[20]          Schwedhelm ER, Raigrodski AJ. A technique for locating implant abutment screws of posterior cement-retained metal-ceramic restorations with ceramic occlusal surfaces. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 95: 165-167.

[21]          Al-Omari WM, Shadid R, Abu-Naba’a L, El Masoud B. Porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained, cement-retained, and screwcement-retained implant-supported metal ceramic posterior crowns. J Prosthodont. 2010; 19: 263-273.

[22]          Michalakis K, Pissiotis AL, Kang K, Hirayama H, Garefis PD, Petridis H. The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007; 22: 569-574.

[23]          Derafshi R, Farzin M, Taghva M, Heidary H, Atashkar B. The effects of new design of access hole on porcelain fracture resistance of implant-supported crowns. J Dent. 2015; 16 (1 suppl): 61–67.

[24]          Braden M. Heat conduction in normal human teeth. Arch Oral Biol. 1964; 9: 479-486.

[25]          Karl M, Graef F, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM. In vitro effect of load cycling on metal-ceramic cement- and screw-retained implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2007; 97: 137-140.

[26]          Torrado E, Ercoli C, Al Mardini M, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L. A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cement retained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 91: 532-537.

[27]          Mokhtarpour H, EftekharAshtiani R, Mahshid M, Tabatabaian F, Alikhasi M. Effect of screw access hole preparation on fracture load of implant-supported zirconia-based crowns: an in vitro study. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2016; 10: 181-188.

[28]         Saboury A, Mahshid M, Tabatabaian F, Moghadam L. Effect of screw access hole design on the fracture resistance of implant-supported zirconia-based restorations. J Esthet Rest or Dent. 2018; 30: 545-550.