Evaluation of the effect of surface roughness and modification of implant abutment axial wall on the retention of zirconium oxide copings before and after thermocycling

Parviz Amini; Maryam Hejazi; Masumeh Taghva; Sina Safari

doi:10.4317/jced.61175

Evaluation of the effect of surface roughness and modification of implant abutment axial wall on the retention of zirconium oxide copings before and after thermocycling

J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Apr 1;16(4):e399-e405. doi: 10.4317/jced.61175. eCollection 2024 Apr.

Authors

Parviz Amini¹, Maryam Hejazi², Masumeh Taghva², Sina Safari³

Affiliations

¹ DDS. Prosthodontics Research Center, School of Dentistry, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
² DDS, MSc. Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
³ DDS, MSc. Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of one-wall elimination of the abutment and also the surface treatment of the abutment on the retention of cement-retained, implant-supported zirconium oxide copings.

Material and methods: In this experimental study, four straight abutments were connected to four implant analogs (DIO, UF, Busan, Korea) with 35 Ncm torque. They are mounted vertically in resin blocks. Abutments were prepared as following groups: A) abutment was used in its intact standard form as a control group. B) 4 mm of the flat wall was removed to produce an abutment with 3 walls. C) The abutment surface was abraded with 50 µm AL2O3 powder. D) 4 mm of a flat wall of the abutment was removed, then the abutment surface was abraded with 50 µm AL2O3 airborne particle.10 zirconium oxide copings were made. Samples were cemented with temp bond NE to abutments. The retention of copings was measured before and after incubation using the universal testing machine. T-test, one-way ANOVA, and Post Hoc Tukey Test were used for statistical analysis of data.

Results: In all groups, retention was decreased after thermocycling (P ≤0.001). 3 wall abutments had less retention than the control group before thermocycling. A significant difference was detected between 3 wall abutments and 4 walls of sandblasted abutments before thermocycling. After thermocycling, no difference in retention was seen between groups.

Conclusions: Thermocycling significantly reduces the retention of implant-supported ceramic copings. Sandblasting abutments with 50 µm AL2O3 air-borne particles did not increase the retention of ziconium oxide copings which were cemented with temp bond NE. One wall elimination of abutment decreased the retention of zirconia copings. Key words:Retention, crown, abutment, zirconia coping, sandblasting.