대한치과보철학회지 (The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics)

  • 제54권4호
  • /
  • Pages.458-467
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 0301-2875(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-3789(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

임플란트 보철물의 합착에 대한 문헌고찰

A literature review on cementation of implant prosthesis

  • 이은석 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 보철학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 고경호 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 보철학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 허윤혁 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 보철학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 박찬진 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 보철학교실 및 구강과학연구소) ;
  • 조리라 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 보철학교실 및 구강과학연구소)
  • Lee, Eun-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics and Research Institute of Oral Science, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Ko, Kyung-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics and Research Institute of Oral Science, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Huh, Yoon-Hyuk (Department of Prosthodontics and Research Institute of Oral Science, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Park, Chan-Jin (Department of Prosthodontics and Research Institute of Oral Science, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Cho, Lee-Ra (Department of Prosthodontics and Research Institute of Oral Science, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • 투고 : 2016.06.28
  • 심사 : 2016.09.01
  • 발행 : 2016.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

시멘트유지형 임플란트 보철물은 교합과 심미적인 측면에서 상당한 장점을 가지지만 시멘트잔사가 남을 경우 임플란트주위염을 유발하는데 대부분 후기 증상으로 발현되며 특히 제거의 어려움과 시멘트잔사로 인한 임플란트주위염은 임플란트의 예후를 위협하는 요인이 될 수 있다. 그러므로 사용목적에 맞는 유지력을 가지는 시멘트를 선택하는 것이 필요하다. 일반적으로 레진시멘트, 폴리카복실레이트시멘트, RMGI 시멘트가 GI 시멘트나 ZPC보다 높은 유지력을 가지며 임시합착제는 열순환 후에는 유지력이 낮아진다. 시멘트 외에도 지대주의 높이와 경사도, 지대주의 수 및 분포도 유지력에 영향을 줄 수 있다. 무엇보다 목적에 맞는 시멘트를 선택하고 생역학적인 원칙을 준수한 보철물을 설계하고 시멘트잔사를 줄이는 방법을 이용하여 합착한 후 방사선사진으로 잔사를 확인하여 완벽하게 제거해야 시멘트유지형 보철의 성공을 얻을 수 있을 것이다.

Cement-retained implant prosthesis has several advantages in the esthetic and occlusal aspects. However, the difficulty of the retrievability and the possibility of peri-implantitis induced by the cement excess would be a threatening factor to the implant prognosis. Peri-implantitis resulting from the remaining cement could occur later on to the patients with periodontitis history. Retention can be controlled by selecting the right cement type. Retention of the cement was the strongest in the resin cement, followed by resin modified glass ionomer cement, poIycarboxylate cement, zinc phosphate cement and glass ionomer cement. Retention of the provisional cement weakened after thermocycling. Other factors such as the abutment number, abutment alignment, height and taper of the abutment can also affect the total retention. To the success of the cement-retained prosthesis, it's important to select the right cement for the clinical purpose. The prosthesis should be fabricated in accordance with the biomechanical requirements. The prosthesis should be cemented with the techniques to reduce the excess cement as much as possible. In addition, the excess cement should be identified using the radiography and carefully removed.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Katona TR, Goodacre CJ, Brown DT, Roberts WE. Force-moment systems on single maxillary anterior implants: effects of incisal guidance, fixture orientation, and loss of bone support. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:512-22.
  2. Nissan J, Narobai D, Gross O, Ghelfan O, Chaushu G. Long-term outcome of cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported partial restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:1102-7.
  3. Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. Bacterial colonization of the internal part of two-stage implants. An in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1993;4:158-61. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1993.040307.x
  4. Agar JR, Cameron SM, Hughbanks JC, Parker MH. Cement removal from restorations luted to titanium abutments with simulated subgingival margins. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:43-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70086-6
  5. Berglundh T, Gislason O, Lekholm U, Sennerby L, Lindhe J. Histopathological observations of human periimplantitis lesions. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31:341-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00486.x
  6. Linkevicius T, Puisys A, Vindasiute E, Linkeviciene L, Apse P. Does residual cement around implant-supported restorations cause peri-implant disease? A retrospective case analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:1179-84.
  7. Pauletto N, Lahiffe BJ, Walton JN. Complications associated with excess cement around crowns on osseointegrated implants: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:865-8.
  8. Gapski R, Neugeboren N, Pomeranz AZ, Reissner MW. Endosseous implant failure influenced by crown cementation: a clinical case report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:943-6.
  9. Korsch M, Obst U, Walther W. Cement-associated peri-implantitis: a retrospective clinical observational study of fixed implant-supported restorations using a methacrylate cement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:797-802. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12173
  10. Wilson TG Jr. The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol 2009;80:1388-92. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090115
  11. Wadhwani C, Hess T, Faber T, Pineyro A, Chen CS. A descriptive study of the radiographic density of implant restorative cements. J Prosthet Dent 2010;103:295-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60062-5
  12. Han KH, Cheon HY, Kim MS, Shin SW, Lee JY. Comparative study on the radiopacity of different resin-based implant cements. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2014;52:97-104. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2014.52.2.97
  13. Schneider RL. Evaluation of the retention of castings to endosseous dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:73-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(87)80147-6
  14. Squier RS, Agar JR, Duncan JP, Taylor TD. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:793-8.
  15. Mansour A, Ercoli C, Graser G, Tallents R, Moss M. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:343-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130401.x
  16. Wadhwani C, Chung KH. Bond strength and interactions of machined titanium-based alloy with dental cements. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:660-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.015
  17. Maeyama H, Sawase T, Jimbo R, Kamada K, Suketa N, Fukui J, Atsuta M. Retentive strength of metal copings on prefabricated abutments with five different cements. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7:229-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00068.x
  18. Pan YH, Lin CK. The effect of luting agents on the retention of dental implant-supported crowns. Chang Gung Med J 2005;28:403-10.
  19. Michalakis KX, Pissiotis AL, Hirayama H. Cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:545-9.
  20. Ramp MH, Dixon DL, Ramp LC, Breeding LC, Barber LL. Tensile bond strengths of provisional luting agents used with an implant system. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:510-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70203-9
  21. Cho JH, Jeong CM, Jeon YC. Effects of various cements and thermocycling on retentive strengths of cemented implant-supported prostheses. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2003;41:466-75.
  22. Kim Y, Yamashita J, Shotwell JL, Chong KH, Wang HL. The comparison of provisional luting agents and abutment surface roughness on the retention of provisional implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2006;95:450-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.03.020
  23. Sheets JL, Wilcox C, Wilwerding T. Cement selection for cementretained crown technique with dental implants. J Prosthodont 2008;17:92-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00262.x
  24. Akca K, Iplikcioglu H, Cehreli MC. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:536-42.
  25. Lee DH, Suh KW, Ryu JJ. Comparison of retentive forces of temporary cements and abutment height used with implant-supported prosthesis. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2008;43:280-9.
  26. Bresciano M, Schierano G, Manzella C, Screti A, Bignardi C, Preti G. Retention of luting agents on implant abutments of different height and taper. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:594-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01159.x
  27. Jung JW, Kim JH, Kim SJ, Moon HS, Shim JS. The comparison of the retention of the full veneer casted gold crowns with different implant abutment shapes and types of cements. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2009;25:403-15.
  28. Wadhwani C, Hess T, Pineyro A, Opler R, Chung KH. Cement application techniques in luting implant-supported crowns: a quantitative and qualitative survey. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27:859-64.
  29. Canullo L, Cocchetto R, Marinotti F, Oltra DP, Diago MP, Loi I. Clinical evaluation of an improved cementation technique for implant-supported restorations: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015 Apr 6.
  30. Galva'n G, Kois JC, Chaiyabutr Y, Kois D. Cemented implant restoration: A technique for minimizing adverse biologic consequences. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:482-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.10.017
  31. Wadhwani C, Pineyro A. Technique for controlling the cement for an implant crown. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:57-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60102-5
  32. Chee WW, Duncan J, Afshar M, Moshaverinia A. Evaluation of the amount of excess cement around the margins of cement-retained dental implant restorations: the effect of the cement application method. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:216-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60047-5
  33. Schwedhelm ER, Lepe X, Aw TC. A crown venting technique for the cementation of implant-supported crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:89-90. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2003.66
  34. Begum Z, Sonika R, Pratik C. Effect of different cementation techniques on retained excess cement and uniaxial retention of the implant-supported prosthesis: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:1333-7. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3724
  35. Hess TA. A technique to eliminate subgingival cement adhesion to implant abutments by using polytetrafluoroethylene tape. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:365-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.06.026
  36. Wadhwani C, Rapoport D, La Rosa S, Hess T, Kretschmar S. Radiographic detection and characteristic patterns of residual excess cement associated with cement-retained implant restorations: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2012;107:151-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60046-8
  37. 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;19:87-91.
  38. Vindasiute E, Puisys A, Maslova N, Linkeviciene L, Peciuliene V, Linkevicius T. Clinical Factors Influencing Removal of the Cement Excess in Implant-Supported Restorations. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17:771-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12170
  39. Schweitzer DM, Berg RW, Mancia GO. A technique for retrieval of cement-retained implant-supported prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2011;106:134-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60110-8
  40. Prestipino V, Ingber A, Kravitz J, Whitehead GM. A practical approach for retrieving cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. Quintessence Dent Technol 2001;24:182-7.