Kim HJ, Karasan D, Park K, Kwon HB, Han JS, Lee JH* (Corresponding author). Abutment margin levels and residual cement occurrence in cement-retained implant restorations: An observational study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2023 Jan;34(1):33-41. doi: 10.1111/clr.14015. Epub 2022 Nov 3. PMID: 36278423.
*The cover image is based on the Original Article Abutment margin levels and residual cement occurrence in cement-retained implant restorations: An observational study by Hyun Ju Kim et al., https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14015.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the association between different vertical levels of the abutment margin and residual cement prevalence in cement-retained implant restorations with customized abutments.
Methods: One hundred and nine single-unit cement-retained implant restorations with a screw-access channel were included. The crowns were intraorally cemented on the abutments, and excess cement was removed. The abutment-crown complex was unscrewed, and the abutment-crown complex and peri-implant tissue were photographed. Residual cement presence was recorded by dividing the abutment-crown complex and peri-implant tissue into four quadrants: mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual. The prevalence of residual cement was compared according to the height of the custom abutment margin of the corresponding quadrant. A multilevel model was used for statistical analysis (α = .05).
Results: Cement remnants were discovered on 72.48% of the dental implants. When the restoration quadrants were compared, cement remnants were present on 51.38%, 39.45%, 20.18%, and 17.43% of the mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual surfaces, respectively (p < .01). Regarding the abutment margin level, cement residues were found in 60.22% and 61.4% of the 0.5 mm subgingival and ≥1 mm subgingival margin groups, respectively, which were significantly more than those in the supragingival (23.65%) and equigingival (26.59%) margin groups (p < .01). After adjustment for confounding factors, the adjusted odds ratio (with 95% confidence interval) for residual cement in the subgingival margin groups was 3.664 (1.71, 7.852) when compared to the supragingival and equigingival margin groups.
Conclusions: The risk of residual cement occurrence was 3.66-fold higher with a subgingival abutment margin than with supragingival and equigingival abutment margins.