Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAydın, Murat
dc.contributor.authorYalcin, Serdar
dc.contributor.authorGultekin, B. Alper
dc.contributor.authorGultekin, Pınar
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-04T18:38:03Z
dc.date.available2021-03-04T18:38:03Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationGultekin P., Gultekin B. A. , Aydın M., Yalcin S., "Cement selection for implant-supported crowns fabricated with different luting space settings.", Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, cilt.22, ss.112-9, 2013
dc.identifier.issn1059-941X
dc.identifier.otherav_8bc099eb-72b4-4d01-891e-c650e3b4e82f
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/94581
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849x.2012.00912.x
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To measure and compare the retentive strength of cements specifically formulated for luting restorations onto implant abutments and to investigate the effect of varying cement gap on retention strength of implant-supported crowns. Materials and Methods: Standard titanium abutments were scanned by means of a 3D digital laser scanner. One hundred and sixty standard metal copings were designed by a Computer Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system with two cement gap values (20 and 40 m). The copings were cemented to the abutments using the following eight cements with one being the control, zinc oxide temporary cement, while the other seven were specifically formulated implant cements (n = 10): Premier Implant Cement, ImProv, Multilink Implant, EsTemp Implant, Cem-Implant, ImplaTemp, MIS Crown Set, and TempBond NE. The specimens were placed in 100% humidity for 24 hours, and subjected to a pull-out test using a universal testing machine at a 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed. The test results were analyzed with two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, post hoc Tamhane' s T2, and student's t-tests at a significance level of 0.05. Results: Statistical analysis revealed significant differences in retention strength across the cement groups (p 0.05). Conclusions: Resin cements specifically formulated for implant-supported restorations demonstrated significant differences in retention strength. The ranking of cements presented in the study is meant to be an arbitrary guide for the clinician in deciding the appropriate cement selection for CAD/CAM-fabricated metal copings onto implant abutments with different luting space settings.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectDiş Hekimliği
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectDİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ, ORAL CERRAHİ VE TIP
dc.subjectTıp
dc.titleCement selection for implant-supported crowns fabricated with different luting space settings.
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalJournal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists
dc.contributor.departmentİstanbul Üniversitesi , Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü , Mimarlık
dc.identifier.volume22
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.startpage112
dc.identifier.endpage9
dc.contributor.firstauthorID18021


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record