Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Retention Strength between Polyetheretherketone Abutments and Polymethyl Methacrylate Crowns Bonded with Different Types of Dental Cements|
|Abstract:||The 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.|
|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.