Comparative Evaluation Of The Marginal Fit Of Combination Implant Crown And Cement Retained Conventional Crown– An In Vitro Study
European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine,
2023, Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages 5085-5095
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare the marginal gap of combination implant crown (having access channel on occlusal surface) and conventional cement retained crown by means of stereomicroscope.Materials & Methods: A total of 30 standardized implant crowns were fabricated on 30 implant abutments attached to two implants. Of which, 15 crowns were combination implant crowns and 15 were conventional cement-retained crowns and were grouped as, Group 1: Implant received 15 abutments and 15 combination implant crowns were fabricated for each abutment. Group 2: Implant received 15 abutments and 15 conventional cement-retained crowns were fabricated for each abutment. Crowns were cemented on implant abutment using type I glass ionomer cement and the marginal fit was evaluated by means of a digital camera attached to a stereomicroscope adjusted to magnification level of 40X. Marginal gap was evaluated on all the four surfaces namely mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual of crown. Three measurements on each aspect of the cemented crown, comprising of twelve measurements were recorded after cementation. Measurement for each crown was averaged to determine the mean marginal discrepancy of both the groups.
Statistical Analysis: Descriptive statistics included calculation of means and standard deviation. Data distribution was assessed for Normality using Shapiro-Wilk test. Student’s t-test was used for paired samples for intragroup comparison. Spearman’s correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the relationship between the scores given by the dentists to each crown for assessing its marginal discrepancy. A correlation is strong or positive if the values range from 0.7 to 1. All values were considered statistically significant for a value of p<0.05.
Results: There was a significant difference (p<0.05) between the means of marginal fit of combination implant crown (93.6microns) and means of marginal fit of conventional cement retained crown (158.6microns). The overall results of this in vitro study indicated that among the two groups, group A was the most dimensionally stable followed by group B.
Conclusion: Marginal fit discrepancy was less in combination implant crowns than the conventional cement retained crown, advocating the combination implant crowns with precise margin adaptation as the clinicians’ top pick.
Key Message: Combination implant crowns are advantageous over conventional cement-retained crown in the following ways: a) Combination implant crown utilizes extraoral cementation of crown which provides easy and complete removal and the opportunity to polish the abutment crown interface after cementation and prior to intraoral placement. b) Abutment crown connection can be placed subgingivally; allows porcelain to be placed subgingivally, hiding any metal in a shallow sulcus and obviating the possibility of metal exposure due to any future gingival migration. c) Emergence contour can be ideally created in the crown without regard to gingival margin position
- Article View: 19
- PDF Download: 16