IADR Abstract Archives
Implant Cement Radiopacity and Compressive Strength
Objectives: Evaluate radiopacity and compressive strength of implant cements compared to final and provisional cements for use with final crowns on implant-supported abutments.
Methods: Five resin implant cements, four final cements, and two provisional zinc oxide cements were evaluated. Cylinders 5mmX2mm imaged using CMOS digital radiography with calibration fixtures and digitally analyzed; n=3. Cylinders 3.8mmX5.7mm crushed using MTS 810 system (MTS), plotting displacement verses load; n=5. Data analyzed: radiopacity, compressive strength at yield point, ultimate strength, and average rate of load verses deformation.
Results: Data in table show averages and standard deviations for cements grouped by type.
Implant cements M4 and M5 had radiopacity similar to enamel (≈200% aluminum equivalency) for easy identification on radiographs. Final cements and provisional cements also had high radiopacity. Relatively low compressive strength at yield point of cements M1, M2, M3, M4, and F1 shows ability to flex, possibly minimizing transfer of loading forces to implant. Final resin cements F2, F3, and F4 were rigid and exhibited minimal yield under load. Provisional cements P1 and P2 had low strength and are generally contraindicated for clinical applications with final crowns on abutments. Deformation rate may correlate with ability to remove crown with minimal damage. Low values indicate cements that deform and yield more readily.
Conclusions: Implant resin cements show flexural properties and a yield point before reaching their ultimate compressive strength, which make them clinically desirable to preserve implant integrity and for situations where the crown may need to be removed without damage for access to the abutment screw. Telio CS Cem Implant had best combination of high radiopacity and low compressive strength and low deformation rate among implant cements tested.
Methods: Five resin implant cements, four final cements, and two provisional zinc oxide cements were evaluated. Cylinders 5mmX2mm imaged using CMOS digital radiography with calibration fixtures and digitally analyzed; n=3. Cylinders 3.8mmX5.7mm crushed using MTS 810 system (MTS), plotting displacement verses load; n=5. Data analyzed: radiopacity, compressive strength at yield point, ultimate strength, and average rate of load verses deformation.
Results: Data in table show averages and standard deviations for cements grouped by type.
Implant cements M4 and M5 had radiopacity similar to enamel (≈200% aluminum equivalency) for easy identification on radiographs. Final cements and provisional cements also had high radiopacity. Relatively low compressive strength at yield point of cements M1, M2, M3, M4, and F1 shows ability to flex, possibly minimizing transfer of loading forces to implant. Final resin cements F2, F3, and F4 were rigid and exhibited minimal yield under load. Provisional cements P1 and P2 had low strength and are generally contraindicated for clinical applications with final crowns on abutments. Deformation rate may correlate with ability to remove crown with minimal damage. Low values indicate cements that deform and yield more readily.
Conclusions: Implant resin cements show flexural properties and a yield point before reaching their ultimate compressive strength, which make them clinically desirable to preserve implant integrity and for situations where the crown may need to be removed without damage for access to the abutment screw. Telio CS Cem Implant had best combination of high radiopacity and low compressive strength and low deformation rate among implant cements tested.
2640880_File000000.jpg