Dislodgement Resistance of Zirconia Copings Cemented onto Zirconia and Titanium Abutments.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of the cement type and abutment material on the tensile strength required to dislodge zirconia copings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two experimental groups of abutments were prepared: (1) titanium abutments (n = 30) and (2) zirconia abutments (n = 30). Sixty zirconia copings (custom designed) were fabricated using 3-dimensional computer-assisted design to have a 6-mm projection above the abutment to accommodate a hole, through which a wire was inserted to attach the zirconia coping to a universal testing machine. Each abutment was placed onto an implant analog embedded in acrylic resin blocks to fit onto the universal testing machine. The zirconia copings were cemented onto the abutments with a provisional luting agent, zinc phosphate (ZP) cement, and adhesive resin cement, and after 5500 thermocycles, a tensile force was applied at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The removal force was recorded for each specimen. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and 1-way ANOVA were used for the statistical analysis (P < 0.05). RESULTS: The mean forces necessary to remove the zirconia copings from titanium abutments were 6.52, 83.09, and 251.18 N for temporary cement, ZP cement, and resin cement, respectively. For zirconia abutments, the required forces were 17.82, 116.41, and 248.72 N. CONCLUSIONS: The abutment material had no effect on retention, but the cement type affected the retention of the zirconia copings.

The Effect of Water or Wax-based Binders on the Chemical and Morphological Characteristics of the Margin Ceramic-Framework Interface.

This study evaluated the effect of binder choice in mixing ceramic powder on the chemical and morphological features between the margin ceramic-framework interfaces. Titanium and zirconia frameworks (15 x 5 x 0.5 mm3) were veneered with margin ceramics prepared with two different binders, namely a) water/conventional or b) wax-based. For each zirconia framework material, four different margin ceramics were used: a- Creation Zi (Creation Willi Geller International); b- GC Initial Zr (GC America); Triceram (Dentaurum); and d- IPS emax (voclar Vivadent). For the titanium framework, three different margin ceramics were used: a- Creation Ti (Creation Willi Geller International); b- Triceram (Dentaurum); and c- VITA Titaniumkeramik (Vita Zahnfabrik). The chemical composition of the framework-margin ceramic interface was analyzed using Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) and porosity level was quantified within the margin ceramic using an image program (ImageJ) from four random areas (100 x 100 pixels) on each SEM image. EDS analysis showed the presence of Carbon at the margin ceramic-framework interface in the groups where wax-based binder technique was used with the concentration being the highest for the IPS emax ZirCAD group. While IPS system (IPS ZirCAD and IPS Emax) presented higher porosity concentration using wax binder, in the other groups wax-based binder reduced the porosity of margin ceramic, except for Titanium - Triceram combination.

Effect of mixing techniques on bacterial attachment and disinfection time of polyether impression material.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was 2-fold. The first aim was to evaluate the effects of mixing technique (hand-mixing or auto-mixing) on bacterial attachment to polyether impression materials. The second aim was to determine whether bacterial attachment to these materials was affected by length of exposure to disinfection solutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Polyether impression material samples (n = 144) were prepared by hand-mixing or auto-mixing. Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were used in testing. After incubation, the bacterial colonies were counted and then disinfectant solution was applied. The effect of disinfection solution was evaluated just after the polymerization of impression material and 30 min after polymerization. Differences in adherence of bacteria to the samples prepared by hand-mixing and to those prepared by auto-mixing were assessed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. For evaluating the efficiency of the disinfectant, Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test was used. RESULTS: E. coli counts were higher in hand-mixed materials (P < 0.05); no other statistically significant differences were found between hand- and auto-mixed materials. According to the Kruskal-Wallis test, significant differences were found between the disinfection procedures (Z > 2.394). CONCLUSION: The methods used for mixing polyether impression material did not affect bacterial attachment to impression surfaces. In contrast, the disinfection procedure greatly affects decontamination of the impression surface.