Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2025 (SCI-Expanded)
Statement of problem: Excess cement in implant-supported restorations can lead to peri-implant diseases, and its removal remains a clinical challenge. The optimum method of minimizing excess cement is unclear. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare 3 cementation techniques and 3 cement types and measure excess cement. Material and methods: A total of 63 metal crowns and universal straight abutments were divided into 3 groups according to cementation techniques: direct (DT), polytetrafluoroethylene tape (PTT), and extraoral replica (ERT). (n=21) In all groups, 3 different cement types were used: glass ionomer cement (Meron; Voco), polycarboxylate cement (Adhesor Carbofine; Pentron), and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (GC FujiCEM Evolve; GC Corp) (n=7). The cemented crown-abutment combination was examined under a ×10 magnification stereomicroscope, and the cement remaining on the surface was calculated by using a computer program (ImageJ and NIH Image Software; National Institutes of Health). The relationship between cementation techniques and cement type and residual cement was examined with a 2-way ANOVA test. A post hoc test was used for intragroup comparisons (α=.05). Results: Regardless of the cement type, the residual cement amount was found to be the lowest in the ERT group (P<.001). Regardless of the technique, the lowest residual cement was found in glass ionomer cement (1.55 ±1.05 mm², 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.02). Conclusions: The extraoral replica technique was the most effective in reducing excess cement, and cement type influenced its amount, with the highest residual cement amounts observed with resin-modified glass ionomer cement among all techniques.