Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/74810
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorParin Jeeranunen_US
dc.contributor.authorNonnatee Chalongkuakulen_US
dc.contributor.authorMansuang Arksornnukiten_US
dc.contributor.authorPatcharawan Silthampitagen_US
dc.contributor.authorPathawee Khongkhunthianen_US
dc.contributor.authorPisaisit Chaijareenonten_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-16T06:50:39Z-
dc.date.available2022-10-16T06:50:39Z-
dc.date.issued2022-01-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn1309100Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85138174736en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85138174736&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/74810-
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this study was to compare retention strength of various cement types in bonding polyetheretherketone (PEEK) abutments to polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) crowns and their failure modes. After PEEK abutments preparation, the surface roughness, surface topography and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis were examined to confirm the same surface characteristics. Then, fifty PEEK abutments were divided into 5 groups (n=10), one for each cement type. Clear PMMA crowns were cemented to abutments using zinc phosphate cement (ZPC), zinc oxide temporary cement without eugenol (Temp-Bond™ NE) and three resin cements (RelyX™ U200, Panavia™ F 2.0, and Superbond C&B®). The retention strength and failure modes were examined using a universal testing machine and stereomicroscope. The results were analyzed with One-way ANOVA at a significance level of 0.05. The surface roughness, topography, and EDS analysis confirmed the same surface characteristic of all PEEK abutment specimens. Statistical analysis revealed significant difference across cements groups (p<0.01). The highest retention strength was Superbond C&B followed by RelyX™ U200, Panavia™ F 2.0, Temp-Bond™ NE, and ZPC respectively. All of the specimens in each group exhibited mixed failure mode except the Superbond C&B® group. Within the limitation of this in vitro study, Superbond C&B® exhibited the highest retention strength, whereas RelyX™ U200, Panavia™ F 2.0, Zinc phosphate cement, and Temp-Bond™ NE failed to provide sufficient retention strength.en_US
dc.subjectDentistryen_US
dc.titleRetention Strength between Polyetheretherketone Abutments and Polymethyl Methacrylate Crowns Bonded with Different Types of Dental Cementsen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleJournal of International Dental and Medical Researchen_US
article.volume15en_US
article.stream.affiliationsChulalongkorn Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.