English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Cement-retained implant-supported restorations has been preferred by many clinicians due to its ease of production, low cost and similarity to dental supported restorations [1]. In the literature, many complications caused by residual cement, ranging from acute severe bone resorption to implant loss, have been published as a case report/ series [2-7]. In another study [8], residual cement was seen in 81% of implant cases that are clinically identi ied as periimplantitis. Hence it has been indicated that a strong relationship has been determined between residual cement and development of chronic periimplant infection [9].

Applications to reduce the amount of excess cement for cement-retained implant supported prostheses: Mini review