The Retention of Cast Metal Dowels Fabricated by Direct and Indirect Techniques

Purpose: To explore the effect of fabrication technique, cement type, and cementation procedure on retention of cast metal dowels.
Methods and Materials: Eighty intact single-rooted teeth were selected. The clinical crown was removed at the cementoenamel junction level. Each root was prepared to receive a cast metal dowel of 10-mm length and 1.45 mm in diameter. The 80 specimens were divided into two major groups of 40 based on fabrication technique (direct and indirect). Each group was further divided into four subgroups of ten based on the cement type (zinc phosphate and glass ionomer), and cementation procedure (with and without lentulo spiral). The dowels were subjected to a constantly increasing tensile force, in a universal Instron testing machine, at crosshead speed of 5 mm/min until failure.
Results: The most significant factor to affect retention was the cementation procedure, as cementation with lentulo spiral produced greater retention than cementation without the use of lentulo spiral ( p < 0.05); however, there seems to be a close interaction between fabrication technique, cement type, and cementation procedure ( p = 0.051). The least retentive group was the one fabricated by direct technique, cemented with zinc phosphate without the use of lentulo spiral.
Conclusion: Fabrication technique does not affect retention of cast dowels, except when zinc phosphate was the luting agent and placed in the canal space without using a lentulo spiral. The cementation procedure had a significant effect on retention; thus, it is recommended that cementation should be done using the lentulo spiral.     

Porcelain Fracture Resistance of Screw‐Retained,Cement‐Retained,and Screw‐Cement‐Retained Implant‐Supported Metal Ceramic Posterior Crowns

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the porcelain fracture resistance between screw‐retained, cement‐retained, and combined screw‐ and cement‐retained metal–ceramic (MC) implant‐supported posterior single crowns; and to investigate the effect of offsetting the occlusal screw‐access opening on porcelain fracture resistance of screw‐retained and cement‐retained MC implant‐supported posterior single crowns. Materials and Methods: Forty standardized MC molar‐shaped restorations were fabricated. The 40 restorations were divided into four groups (SRC, SRO, CRP, and CSC) of 10 specimens each. Group SRC: screw‐retained, screw‐access hole placed in the center of the occlusal surface; Group SRO: screw‐retained, screw access hole placed 1 mm offset from the center of the occlusal surface toward the buccal cusp; Group CRP: cement‐retained, zinc phosphate cement was used; Group CSC: cement‐retained with a screw‐access hole in the center of the occlusal surface. The screw‐retained restorations and abutments were directly attached to 3i implant fixtures embedded in acrylic resin blocks. Subsequently, all test specimens were thermocycled and vertically loaded in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm/min until fracture. Mean values of load at fracture (in N) were calculated in each group and compared with a one‐way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized test (α= 0.05). Results: Mean values of loads required to fracture the restorations were as follows (N): Group SRC: 1721 ± 593; Group SRO: 1885 ± 491; Group CRP: 3707 ± 1086; Group CSC: 1700 ± 526. Groups SRC, SRO, and CSC required a significantly lower force to fracture the porcelain than did the CRP group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The cement‐retained restorations showed significantly higher mean fracture loads than the restorations having screw‐access openings in their occlusal surface. The position of the screw‐access hole within the occlusal surface did not significantly affect the porcelain fracture resistance.