The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants · 2000
Cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Michalakis K X, Pissiotis A L, Hirayama H
Аннотация
The major disadvantage of cement-retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs) is difficulty in retrievability. The retentive strengths of the provisional luting agents usually employed in these cases are therefore an important consideration. This study evaluated the cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of FPDs supported by 2 implants or 4 implants. Nogenol luting agent exhibited the lowest retentive values in both types of FPD. ImProv proved to be the most retentive cement of all tested. Temp Bond NE and Temp Bond presented significantly different values (P < .05) for the 2-implant FPD, but not for the 4-implant model. On the basis of the study results, it may be concluded that Nogenol appears to be more appropriate for cementation of both 2- and 4-implant-supported FPDs when removal of the provisionally cemented superstructure is anticipated.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Analysis of VarianceCementationDental AbutmentsDental CementsDental Prosthesis RetentionDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDental Restoration FailureDenture, Partial, FixedDenture, Partial, TemporaryDevice RemovalDrug CombinationsEugenolFatty AcidsHumansMaterials TestingResins, PlantSalicylatesTensile StrengthThymolZinc Oxide