These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Retention of gold alloy crowns cemented with traditional and resin cements.
    Author: Pinzón LM, Frey GN, Winkler MM, Tate WH, Burgess JO, Powers JM.
    Journal: Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(4):351-3. PubMed ID: 19639070.
    Abstract:
    The aim of this study was to measure in vitro retention of cast gold crowns cemented with traditional and resin cements. Forty-eight human molars were prepared on a lathe to produce complete crown preparations with a consistent taper and split into six groups, eight crowns in each group. Crowns were cast in a high-gold alloy and then cemented. After 24 hours, the retention force (N) was recorded and mean values were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance and the Fisher post-hoc least significant difference (PLSD) multiple comparisons test (a = .05). Failure sites were examined under 3100 magnification and recorded. Mean values (SD) for each group in increasing order of retention force were: Harvard Cement: 43 N (27), TempoCem: 59 N (16), PermaCem Dual: 130 N (42), RelyX Luting Cement: 279 N (26), Contax and PermaCem Dual: 286 N (38), and TempoCem with Contax and PermaCem Dual: 340 N (14). The Fisher PLSD interval (P = .05) for comparing cements was 29 N. Zinc-phosphate cement and provisional resin cements had the lowest retention forces. Resin cement with a bonding agent and the hybrid-ionomer cement had similar retention forces. Resin cement with a bonding agent applied after use of a provisional resin cement had a significantly higher retention force than the other cements tested.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]