ArticleDental research journal2023
Comparison of marginal leakage and retentive strength of implant-supported milled zirconia and cobalt-chromium copings cemented with different temporary cements.
Article in Dental research journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dental Luting Cements and Peri-Implantitis: Molecular Mechanisms, Clinical Implications and the Role of Autophagy and Nanotechnology-A Narrative Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Clinical Performance and Retention of Partial Implant Restorations Cemented with Fuji PlusMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of implant luting cements on the retention of cement-retained, implant-supported zirconia restorations fabricated using CAD-CAM technology - anBiomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2025Article
- Influence of the Composition of Provisional Luting Materials on the Bond Strength of Temporary Single-Tooth Crowns on Titanium Abutments.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Few studies assessed the effect of coping material (particularly milled metal copings) on the retentive strength of cements and reported contradictory results. Thus, this study aims to assess the marginal leakage and retentive strength of implant-supported milled zirconia and cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) copings cemented with different temporary cements. Materials and Methods: In this Results: In the Co-Cr group, the retentive strength values (in Newtons) were as follows: ZP (411.40 ± 5.19) >DC (248.80 ± 5.01) >IL (200.10 ± 5.06) >DT (157.90 ± 5.19) >TB (98.50 ± 6.88). This order was as follows in the zirconia group: ZP (388.70 ± 5.35) >DC (226.60 ± 5.08) >IL (179.00 ± 3.71) >DT (136.00 ± 4.88) >TB (78.60 ± 3.50). All pairwise comparisons were statistically significant ( Conclusion: The type of coping material and cement type significantly affected retentive strength, but not marginal leakage, of implant restorations. Milled Co-Cr copings showed higher retentive strength than zirconia copings, and ZP cement followed by DC yielded the highest retention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38169570PMC10758385W4390595631What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.