# Effect of screw access hole or vent hole opening strategies on the adhesive filling rate of oral implant cement-retained posterior crowns

## TL;DR

This study examined how different hole opening strategies in dental implants affect adhesive filling rates and retention strength.

## Contribution

The study introduces a comparison of various hole opening strategies and their impact on adhesive filling and retention strength in implant crowns.

## Key findings

- Mini-holes (OMH, LDMH) achieved higher abutment shoulder adhesive filling rates compared to larger holes or no holes.
- Axial adhesive filling rates were not significantly affected by hole opening strategies.
- OMH showed the highest retention strength, while ORH showed the lowest.

## Abstract

This study investigated the adhesive filling rate (AFR) of implant prostheses on the abutment shoulder and axial surfaces under various hole opening strategies,and examined the correlation between hole openings and permanent adhesive retention strength.

Implant crowns were divided into five groups: No hole (NH); Occlusal regular hole (ORH: 2.5 mm); Occlusal mini-hole (OMH: 1 mm); Lateral upper mini-hole (LUMH: 1 mm); and Lateral down mini-hole (LDMH: 1 mm). In the AFR experiment, abutments and prostheses were connected with two-color silicone rubber; the coverage of rubber at the inner surface of the prostheses was photographed. Images were analyzed by ImageJ software. In the adhesive retention strength experiment, prostheses and abutments were bonded using permanent resin cement; retention strength was measured using a universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Welch’s ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s honestly significant difference test.

Abutment shoulder AFRs were OMH (98.70 ± 0.42%), LDMH (98.40 ± 1.30%), LUMH (97.92 ± 1.33%), NH (93.99 ± 5.45%), and ORH (86.11 ± 4.90%). One-way ANOVA revealed significant difference among groups (p < 0.001). Axial AFRs were LUMH (99.2 ± 0.47%), ORH (98.3 ± 0.8%), OMH (98.1 ± 0.5%), LDMH (97.9 ± 1.06%), and NH (96.4 ± 4.5%),Welch’s ANOVA indicated no significant difference between groups (p = 0.054). In the retention strength experiment, OMH had the highest retention force (369.58 ± 27.27 N), whereas ORH had the lowest (272.81 ± 41.43 N), showing significant differences (p = 0.002).

Implant screw access hole or vent hole opening strategies affected AFR of implant cement-retained posterior crowns. Larger holes or no openings decreased AFR at the abutment shoulder, whereas axial AFR was less affected. Hole openings variations on implant cement-retained posterior crowns might also influence their retention strength.