Search

Purpose Dental implant is an effective and standardized treatment procedure in the healthcare setting. This study presents a comparison of dental implant reconstruction using screw and cement. It explicitly reviews the studies concerning cement and screws dental implants to determine the efficiency of the two. Patients and methods A systematic review was conducted by comprehensively searching electronic literature. The keywords, such as "Screw versus Cement Retained Fixed Implant Supported Reconstructions," "Screw Retained Fixed Implant." "Cement Implant" and "Dental Implant" were used for article searching. Twelve studies were included based on the determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results No significant difference was found between the screw-retained and cemented retained implant supported reconstructions. Dental implants are associated with complications leading to implant failure based on the type of restoration that is being used; cement-retained restoration and screw-retained restoration. The treatment selection must be based on the significance criteria and the tooth condition. Conclusion Screw-retained implant-supported reconstructions were found to pose less biological and technological complications. Retention of the tooth is more stable and functional when implantation is selected based on the efficiency of a treatment procedure.

Statement of problem: Reliable bond to zirconia based materials has proven to be difficult which is the major limitation against luting zirconia restorations.Purpose: This in vitro study compared effect of selective infiltration etching (SIE) and tribo-chemical silica sandblasting (TSS) on microtensile bond strength to zirconia based material before and after different artificial aging intervals. Materials and methods: Twenty Lava plus high translucency zirconia disks (3 M, ESPE) were randomly divided into two study groups according to their surface treatment: (a) selective infiltration etching (SIE) and (b) tribo-chemical silica sandblasting (TSS). Zirconia disks were bonded to composite resin specimens using Panavia F2.0 resin cement. Zirconia resin bond strength was evaluated using the microtensile bond strength test (MTBS) and the test was repeated before and after the following intervals of accelerated artificial aging; 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks and 4 weeks of water storage (37°C). A repeated measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to analyze the data.Results: The interaction between surface treatments and storage times were statistically significant. Data analysis revealed significant differences between the two surface treatments (P