Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
https://revodontolunesp.com.br/article/doi/10.1590/1807-2577.02421
Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Original Article

Influence of filling materials on the fracture resistance of resin composite used for sealing screw access hole

Influência dos materiais de preenchimento na resistência a fratura das resinas compostas utilizadas para selamento do orifício de acesso ao parafuso

Rodrigo de Paula PEREIRA; Cibele Oliveira de Melo ROCHA; Camila Luiz JABR; Lucas Portela OLIVEIRA; João Neudenir ARIOLI FILHO

Downloads: 0
Views: 253

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Screw-retained restorations have a screw access hole (SAH) sealed with resin composite aiming at safe-guarding the aesthetic features of the ceramic veneer. The loss or wear of the resin composite applied in sealing the SAH is among the most common complications in implant prosthodontics, as the fracture of ceramic veneer.

Objective: Evaluate the influence of sealant materials on the fracture resistance of resin composite applied in sealing screw access hole in screwed (SAH) implants.

Material and method: The samples were produced from UCLA abutments in metallic NiCr alloy with subsequent application of ceramic. After asperisation and conditioning ceramic surface, was applied silane and dentin adhesive, before sealing the conduits with resin composites Z100 and P60. Nine groups (n=10) were evaluated: sealing with Z-100 (ZNC) and P-60 (PNC) without obturation of SAH; sealing with Z100 (ZCP) and P-60 (PCP) with absorbent cotton; Z100 (ZPT) and P60 (PPT) with polytetrafluoroethylene; Z100 (ZGP) and P60 (PGP) with gutta-percha and a cemented ceramic crown (ICS). After the fracture resistance test, the data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (p<.05).

Result: The fracture mode was evaluated by scanning electron microscope. Irrespective of the filling material, the highest mean values of fracture resistance were observed in the sealing with P60 (p=.002). When combined with resins composed of a sealing material, the results obtained were: ZGP: 805.5N/ PGP: 929.5N<ZPT: 1079.1N/ PPT: 1149.5N=ZNC 1183.1N/ PNC: 1350.6N<ZCP: 1403.6N/ PCP: 1641.3N<ICS: 2645.0N.

Conclusion: The use of P60 with cotton wool exhibited the highest fracture resistance.

Keywords

Composite resins, dental implant, flexural resistance, mouth rehabilitation

Resumo

Resumo: Introdução: As próteses parafusadas possuem orifício de acesso ao parafuso (SAH), os quais são selados com resina composta. Sua perda ou desgaste está entre as complicações mais comuns em próteses sobre implantes, associadas a fratura da lâmina cerâmica.

Objetivo: Assim, é importante avaliar a influência dos materiais de selamento na resistência à fratura de resina composta aplicada ao SAH no selamento de prótese sobre implantes parafusadas.

Material e método: As amostras foram produzidas utilizando pilares UCLA em liga metálica de NiCr com posterior aplicação de cerâmica. Após asperização e condicionamento da superfície cerâmica, foram aplicados silano e adesivo dentinário, antes da selagem dos condutos com as resinas compostas Z100 e P60. Foram avaliados nove grupos (n = 10): selamento com Z-100 (ZNC) e P-60 (PNC) sem selamento do SAH; selamento com Z100 (ZCP) e P-60 (PCP) com algodão absorvente; Z100 (ZPT) e P60 (PPT) com politetrafluoroetileno; Z100 (ZGP) e P60 (PGP) com guta-percha e coroa de cerâmica cimentada (ICS). Após o teste de resistência à fratura, os dados foram analisados usando ANOVA de dois fatores e testes Tukey HSD (p<0,05). O tipo de fratura foi avaliado por microscópio eletrônico de varredura.

Resultado: Independentemente do material obturador, os maiores valores médios de resistência à fratura foram observados no selamento com P60 (p=0,002). Quando combinados com resinas compostas por um material de selamento, os resultados obtidos foram: ZGP: 805,5N/ PGP: 929,5N<ZPT: 1079,1N/ PPT: 1149,5N=ZNC 1183,1N/ PNC: 1350,6N <ZCP: 1403,6N / PCP: 1641,3N <ICS: 2645,0N.

Conclusão: O uso de P60 com algodão exibiu a maior resistência à fratura.
 

Palavras-chave

Compósito de resina, implante dentário, resistência flexural, reabilitação oral

References

1 Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004 Mar-Apr;19(2):260-5. PMid:15101598.

2 Karl M, Graef F, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM. In vitro effect of load cycling on metal-ceramic cement- and screw-retained implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Mar;97(3):137-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2007.01.001. PMid:17394911.

3 Karl M, Graef F, Wichmann MG, Heckmann SM. The effect of load cycling on metal ceramic screw-retained implant restorations with unrestored and restored screw access holes. J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Jan;99(1):19-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60004-9. PMid:18182181.

4 Al-Omari WM, Shadid R, Abu-Naba’a L, Masoud BE. Porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained, cement-retained, and screw-cement-retained implant-supported metal ceramic posterior crowns. J Prosthodont. 2010 Jun;19(4):263-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00560.x. PMid:20136704.

5 Torrado E, Ercoli C, Mardini MA, Graser GN, Tallents RH, Cordaro L. A comparison of the porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2004 Jun;91(6):532-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.03.014. PMid:15211294.

6 Zarone F, Sorrentino R, Traini T, Di lorio D, Caputi S. Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw- versus cement-retained porcelain fused to metal single crowns: SEM fractographic analysis. Dent Mater. 2007 Mar;23(3):296-301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.10.013. PMid:16564081.

7 Park SD, Lee Y, Kim YL, Yu SH, Bae JM, Cho HW. Microleakage of different sealing materials in access holes of internal connection implant systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2012 Sep;108(3):173-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60143-7. PMid:22944313.

8 Kurt M, Ural C, Kulunk T, Sanal AF, Erkoçak A. The effect of screw color and technique to fill access hole on the final color of screw-retained implant crowns. J Oral Implantol. 2011 Dec;37(6):673-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00045.1. PMid:20553168.

9 Chiche GJ, Pinault A. Considerations for fabrication of implant-supported posterior restorations. Int J Prosthodont. 1991 Jan-Feb;4(1):37-44. PMid:2012669.

10 Da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Donassollo TA, Cenci MS, Loguércio AD, Moraes RR, Bronkhorst EM, et al. 22-Year clinical evaluation of the performance of two posterior composites with different filler characteristics. Dent Mater. 2011 Oct;27(10):955-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.06.001. PMid:21762980.

11 Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Sep-Oct;18(5):719-28. PMid:14579961.

12 Chee W, Jivraj S. Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations. Br Dent J. 2006 Oct;201(8):501-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4814157. PMid:17057675.

13 Yap AU. Occlusal contact area (OCA) wear of two new composite restoratives. J Oral Rehabil. 2002 Feb;29(2):194-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00814.x. PMid:11856400.

14 de Oliveira JL, Martins LM, Sanada J, de Oliveira PC, do Valle AL. The effect of framework design on fracture resistance of metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 2010 Jul-Aug;23(4):350-2. PMid:20617225.

15 Moráguez OD, Belser UC. The use of polytetrafluoroethylene tape for the management of screw access channels in implant-supported prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2010 Mar;103(3):189-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60029-7. PMid:20188242.

16 Tarica DY, Alvarado VM, Truong ST. Survey of United States dental schools on cementation protocols for implant crown restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2010 Feb;103(2):68-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(10)00016-8. PMid:20141811.

17 Naik S, Tredwin CJ, Nesbit M, Setchell DJ, Moles DR. The effect of engaging the screw access channel of an implant abutment with a cement-retained restoration. J Prosthodont. 2009 Apr;18(3):245-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00408.x. PMid:19141047.

18 Adabo GL, dos Santos Cruz CA, Fonseca RG, Vaz LG. The volumetric fraction of inorganic particles and the flexural strength of composites for posterior teeth. J Dent. 2003 Jul;31(5):353-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00049-6. PMid:12799120.

19 Pereira RP, Rocha CO, Reis JM, Arioli-Filho JN. Influence of sealing of the screw access hole on the fracture resistance of implant-supported restorations. Braz Dent J. 2016 Mar-Apr;27(2):148-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201600575. PMid:27058376.

20 dos Santos JG, Fonseca RG, Adabo GL, dos Santos Cruz CA. Shear bond strength of metal-ceramic repair systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2006 Sep;96(3):165-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.07.002. PMid:16990069.

21 Ozcan M. Evaluation of alternative intra-oral repair techniques for fractured ceramic-fused-to-metal restorations. J Oral Rehabil. 2003 Feb;30(2):194-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01037.x. PMid:12535148.

22 Preiskel HW, Tsolka P. Cement- and screw-retained implant-supported prostheses: up to 10 years of follow-up of a new design. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004 Jan-Feb;19(1):87-91. PMid:14982360.

23 Shadid RM, Abu-Naba’a L, Al-Omari WM, Asfar KR, El Masoud BM. Effect of an occlusal screw-access hole on the fracture resistance of permanently cemented implant crowns: a laboratory study. Int J Prosthodont. 2011 May-Jun;24(3):267-9. PMid:21519576.

24 Sabbagh J, Ryelandt L, Bachérius L, Biebuyck JJ, Vreven J, Lambrechts P, et al. Characterization of the inorganic fraction of resin composites. J Oral Rehabil. 2004 Nov;31(11):1090-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01352.x. PMid:15525388.

25 Ilie N, Hickel R, Valceanu AS, Huth KC. Fracture toughness of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Apr;16(2):489-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0525-z. PMid:21365459.
 


Submitted date:
05/06/2021

Accepted date:
03/09/2022

6269745fa9539563dc719613 rou Articles
Links & Downloads

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Share this page
Page Sections