Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40254777›Full record

ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2025

Selection of Cement Materials and Isolation Techniques for the Effective Removal of Residual Cement in the Cementation.

Süha Kuşçu, Yeliz Hayran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Süha KuşçuDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Yozgat Bozok University, Yozgat, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0805-5888
Yeliz HayranDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Bursa Uludağ University, Bursa, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8664-9083

Funding

Gaziosmanpasa Üniversitesi 2019-107
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study aimed to investigate the impact of different cement and cement isolation techniques used in implant-supported restorations on eliminating residual cement. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study employed two distinct cement isolation methods: rubber dam and polytetrafluoroethylene tape. The study comprised three primary groups comprising 30 samples, categorized based on the isolation methods and control group. The cement excess was removed with a dental explorer probe for the control group. Moreover, three different cement materials were used: polycarboxylate, temporary implant, and resin cement. Each primary group was subdivided into three subgroups according to the type of cement used, leading to 10 samples per subgroup. Cobalt-chromium superstructures, intended to be cemented onto the implant analog-abutment complex, were fabricated using the direct metal laser sintering method. The crowns were filled with cement, and after the cementation process, any excess cement was subsequently removed using the designated isolation method. After removal, images of the cement residues at the gingival margin of the crown-abutment complex and occlusal surface of the gingiva around the implant were captured. These images were then analyzed using Adobe Photoshop CC2018, wherein excess cement was marked using the Lasso Tool to quantify the total area. The excess cement data was analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 23 software.

resultsThe results of the three-way ANOVA showed a difference in excess cement amounts between the isolation methods and cement materials (p < 0.001). In evaluating the isolation methods, the rubber dam was identified as the most suitable for temporary cement, while polytetrafluoroethylene tape was determined as the most suitable method for resin cement. Using a dental probe resulted in the highest amount of residual cement across all cement materials. Among the cement types, polycarboxylate cement exhibited the highest residual cement amount, followed by temporary implant cement and resin cement.

conclusionsThe amount of excess cement was influenced by the isolation method and the type of cement used. The rubber dam emerged as the most effective method for minimizing cement residues. The most significant amount of residual cement was identified for polycarboxylate, whereas the lowest amount was observed for resin cement. The appropriate isolation method should be selected based on the type of cement.

Indexed as

CementationDental CementsDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedCrownsHumansMaterials TestingPolycarboxylate CementPolytetrafluoroethyleneResin CementsRubber DamsDental CementsPolycarboxylate CementPolytetrafluoroethyleneResin Cementscement‐retained implant restorationsdental cementdental implantperi‐implantitisPTFE taperubber dam

Identifiers

PMID40254777
PMCPMC12010056

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.