Evaluation of Milled Titanium versus Laser Sintered Co-Cr Abutments on the Marginal Misfit in Internal Implant-Abutment Connection

An in vitro study using confocal laser scanning microscopy to evaluate the marginal misfits of different implant-supported frameworks

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop and evaluate a simple, non-destructive method for assessing the misfit and passivity of implant-retained prostheses frameworks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To simulate the rehabilitation of a mandible posterior partially edentulous area using 3-unit screw-retained frameworks supported by two implants were fabricated and divided into the following five groups (n = 10 in each group): OP = one-piece framework cast in Co-Cr with the conventional method (control-group); Co-Cr frameworks sectioned and welded by laser (=LAS) or tungsten inert gas (=TIG); Co-Cr CAD-CAM = milled Co-Cr framework; Zir CAD-CAM = milled zirconia framework. The horizontal |X| and vertical |Y| misfits were measured using confocal laser scanning microscopy with one or both screws tightened. Data were analyzed by a two-way ANOVA with repeated measures and Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The greatest |X| misfit was observed in the OP group with both screws tightened (290 µm) and one screw tightened (388 and 340 µm). The conventional casting groups sectioned and welded by laser or TIG had lower mean values (235.35 µm, both screws tightened; and 275 µm, one screw tightened) than the OP framework. However, these values still exceeded those of the milled Co-Cr and zirconia frameworks (190 and 216 µm with both screws tightened). Across all reading conditions, every framework subjected to testing consistently maintained vertical |Y| misfit levels below the threshold of 53 µm; however, the milled frameworks exhibited higher vertical misfits than the frameworks obtained by the conventional cast method.

CONCLUSIONS

The frameworks, whether cast and sectioned with laser welding or milled from Co-Cr, exhibit improved marginal misfit and enhanced passive fit when compared to other fabrication methods. Additionally, the use of confocal laser scanning microscopy is highly effective for passivity and misfit analysis.

Accuracy of fit for cobaltchromium bar over two implants fabricated with different manufacturing techniques: an in-vitro study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the invitro research was to compare the fit of Cobalt Chromium customized bar fabricated with different manufacturing processes cast metal bar, milled bar and 3D printed bar using scanning electron microscope.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clear epoxy resin molds were prepared. In each mold two parallel implants with a 14 mm distance from each other were embedded. Thirty Co-Cr custom bars were constructed and were divided equally into three groups: Group (I) (Co-Cr conv), group (II) milled bar (Co-Cr milled), and group (III) printed bar (Co-Cr print). The marginal fit at implant-abutment interface was scanned using scanning electron microscope (SEM).

RESULTS

There was a significant difference between the three studied groups regarding marginal misfit the between implant and fabricated bars with p-value < 0.001. The highest value of micro-gap distance was found in Co-Cr conventional group (7.95 ± 2.21 μm) followed by Co-Cr 3D printed group (4.98 ± 1.73) and the lower value were found in Co-Cr milled (3.22 ± 0.75).

CONCLUSION

The marginal fit of milled, 3D printed and conventional cast for Co-Cr alloy were within the clinically acceptable range of misfit. CAD/CAM milled Co-Cr bar revealed a superior internal fit at the implant-abutment interface. This was followed by selective laser melting (SLM) 3D printed bar and the least fit was shown for customized bar with the conventional lost wax technique.

Influence of the Use of Transepithelial Abutments vs. Titanium Base Abutments on Microgap Formation at the Dental Implant-Abutment Interface: An In Vitro Study

This in vitro study aimed to assess the presence of microgaps at the implant-abutment interface in monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed prostheses on transepithelial abutments versus Ti-base abutments.

METHODS

Sixty conical connection dental implants were divided into two groups (n = 30). The control group consisted of three-unit bridge monolithic zirconia connected to two implants by a transepithelial abutment. The test group consisted of monolithic zirconia three-unit restoration connected to two implants directly by a titanium base (Ti-base) abutment. The sample was subjected to thermocycling (10,000 cycles at 5 °C to 55 °C, dwelling time 50 s) and chewing simulation (300,000 cycles, under 200 N at frequencies of 2 Hz, at a 30° angle). The microgap was evaluated at six points (mesiobuccal, buccal, distobuccal, mesiolingual, lingual, and distolingual) of each implant-abutment interface by using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U tests (p > 0.05).

RESULTS

The SEM analysis showed a smaller microgap at the implant-abutment interface in the control group (0.270 μm) than in the test group (3.902 μm). Statistically significant differences were observed between both groups (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The use or not of transepithelial abutments affects the microgap size. The transepithelial abutments group presented lower microgap values at the interface with the implant than the Ti-base group in monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed prostheses. However, both groups had microgap values within the clinically acceptable range.

Additively and subtractively manufactured implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review

AIM

To compare and report on the performance of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (iFDPs) fabricated using additive (AM) or subtractive (SM) manufacturing.

METHODS

An electronic search was conducted (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Epistemonikos, clinical trials registries) with a focused PICO question: In partially edentulous patients with missing single (or multiple) teeth undergoing dental implant therapy (P), do AM iFDPs (I) compared to SM iFDPs (C) result in improved clinical performance (O)? Included were studies comparing AM to SM iFDPs (randomized clinical trials, prospective/retrospective clinical studies, case series, in vitro studies).

RESULTS

Of 2'184 citations, no clinical study met the inclusion criteria, whereas six in vitro studies proved to be eligible. Due to the lack of clinical studies and considerable heterogeneity across the studies, no meta-analysis could be performed. AM iFDPs were made of zirconia and polymers. For SM iFDPs, zirconia, lithium disilicate, resin-modified ceramics and different types of polymer-based materials were used. Performance was evaluated by assessing marginal and internal discrepancies and mechanical properties (fracture loads, bending moments). Three of the included studies examined the marginal and internal discrepancies of interim or definitive iFDPs, while four examined mechanical properties. Based on marginal and internal discrepancies as well as the mechanical properties of AM and SM iFDPs, the studies revealed inconclusive results.

CONCLUSION

Despite the development of AM and the comprehensive search, there is very limited data available on the performance of AM iFDPs and their comparison to SM techniques. Therefore, the clinical performance of iFDPs by AM remains to be elucidated.

Mechanical, Chemical, and Biological Properties of 3D-Printed Abutments: A Systematic Review

Aim:

A systematic review of the methods of 3D printing and the materials used so far for the manufacture of abutments was performed to evaluate whether their clinical use is indicated through the mechanical, chemical, and biological analyses carried out.

Materials and Methods:

An electronic search conducted by three independent reviewers was carried out in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, and Lilac databases. The inclusion criterion was researching articles in English that contained as subject the manufacturing of abutments through 3D printing/additive manufacturing. Any meta-analyses, reviews, book chapters, abstracts, letters, conferences papers, and studies without abutments printed were excluded.

Results:

We found 780 references, which after applying the exclusion criteria resulted in the final inclusion of seven articles for review. The studies had a high heterogeneity, showing different materials and methodologies to manufacture abutments, which makes a comparison between them difficult, and for this reason it was not possible to carry out a meta-analysis with the data found.

Conclusions:

Even with the limitations found in the present research, it is possible to conclude that printed abutments have adequate mechanical, chemical, and biological properties that can indicate their clinical use. 3D printing presents high accuracy and speed and can produce customized abutments according to each case.

Endosseous Dental Implant Materials and Clinical Outcomes of Different Alloys: A Systematic Review

In recent years, implantology has made significant progress, as it has now become a safe and predictable practice. The development of new geometries, primary and secondary, of new surfaces and alloys, has made this possible. The purpose of this review is to analyze the different alloys present on the market, such as that in zirconia, and evaluate their clinical differences with those most commonly used, such as those in grade IV titanium. The review, conducted on major scientific databases such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and MDPI yielded a startling number of 305 results. After the application of the filters and the evaluation of the results in the review, only 10 Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) were included. Multiple outcomes were considered, such as Marginal Bone Level (MBL), Bleeding on Probing (BoP), Survival Rate, Success Rate and parameters related to aesthetic and prosthetic factors. There are currently no statistically significant differences between the use of zirconia implants and titanium implants, neither for fixed prosthetic restorations nor for overdenture restorations. Only the cases reported complain about the rigidity and, therefore, the possibility of fracture of the zirconium. Certainly the continuous improvement in these materials will ensure that they could be used safely while maintaining their high aesthetic performance.

The effect of the digital manufacturing technique of cantilevered implant-supported frameworks on abutment screw preload

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the misfit and screw preload at the implant abutment connection of implant supported fixed dental prosthesis with cantilever (ICFDP) manufactured using different digital manufacturing techniques and to compare the screw preload before and after cyclic loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mandibular jaw model with four intra-foraminal implants was scanned using digital scanner. Stereolithography file was used to design a framework with nonengaging (NE) abutments and 10 mm cantilever distal to one terminal implant. Five frameworks were constructed using combined digital-conventional techniques (CAD-cast), and five frameworks were constructed using three-dimensional printing (3DP). Additional CAD-cast framework was constructed in a way that ensures passive fit (PF) to use as control. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) measured the implant abutment connection misfit. Sixty screws were used on the corresponding frameworks. Screws were torqued and pre-cyclic loading reverse torque value (RTV) was recorded. Frameworks were subjected to 200,000 loading cycles with a loading point 9 mm from the center of terminal implants adjacent to the cantilever and post-cyclic loading RTVs were recorded.

RESULTS

Microscopic readings showed significant differences between frameworks. PF demonstrated the lowest measurements of 16.04 (2.6) µm while CAD-cast demonstrated the highest measurements of 29.2 (3.1) µm. In all groups, RTVs were significantly lower than the applied torque. Post-cyclic loading RTV was significantly lower than pre-cyclic loading RTV in PF and 3DP frameworks. Differences in RTVs between the three manufacturing techniques were insignificant.

CONCLUSION

Although CAD-cast and three-dimensionally printed (3DP) both produce frameworks with clinically acceptable misfit, 3DP might not be the technique of choice for maintaining screw’s preload stability under an aggressive loading situation.

Evaluation of customized cobalt-chromium abutments fabricated with different manufacturing process versus titanium stock abutments on the marginal misfit -An in vitro study

Aim

Accurate fit of the abutment to the implant is required for the uniform load distribution throughout the assembly. The study aims to compare the marginal misfit of titanium stock abutments with the cobalt-chromium (CoCr) customized abutments fabricated with the different manufacturing processes in internal hex implant-abutment connection using an appropriate scanning technique.

Setting and Design

In vitro comparative study.

Materials and Methods

A total of 40 abutments were included in the study. Ten titanium stock abutments were used as control (Group CN) and 30 CoCr abutments were fabricated and taken as the test group. Stock abutments were scanned and from obtained images test group abutments were fabricated as follows: Ten cast abutments (Group CA), 10 sintered abutments (Group SA), and 10 milled abutments (Group MA). Endosseous implanst having internal hex connections were matched with 10 stock abutments and 30 customized CoCr abutments. Implants were mounted in a clear epoxy resin block and the abutments were then fitted onto the implants with a torque of 30Ncm. The marginal discrepancy at implant-abutment connections was measured with confocal laser scanning microscope.

Statistical Analysis Used

One-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test was done for statistical analysis.

Results

One-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference in marginal misfit of abutments. The mean marginal misfit was lowest for stock abutments (0.35 ± 0.009 μm). Among the customized abutments, the mean marginal misfit was highest for cast abutments (2.44 ± 0.445 μm) followed by sintered abutments (1.67 ± 0.232 μm) and least for milled abutments (0.65 ± 0.041 μm). A significant difference was found in marginal misfit with cast abutments and sintered abutments when compared to stock abutments (P < 0.001). The difference in marginal misfit was insignificant between stock abutments and milled abutments (P = 0.052).

Conclusion

Difference in marginal misfit exists between the titanium stock abutments and customized CoCr abutments. Among the customized abutments, milled CoCr abutments have the least marginal discrepancy and cast CoCr abutments have a maximum marginal discrepancy. Milled CoCr abutments can be used as an alternative to titanium stock abutments.

Effect of Fabrication Technique on the Microgap of CAD/CAM Cobalt-Chrome and Zirconia Abutments on a Conical Connection Implant: An In Vitro Study

The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the microgaps at the implant-abutment interface when zirconia (Zr) and CAD/CAM or cast Co-Cr abutments were used.

METHODS

Sixty-four conical connection implants and their abutments were divided into four groups (Co-Cr (milled, laser-sintered and castable) and Zirconia (milled)). After chewing simulation (300,000 cycles, under 200 N loads at 2 Hz at a 30° angle) and thermocycling (10,000 cycles, 5 to 50 °C, dwelling time 55 s), the implant-abutment microgap was measured 14 times at each of the four anatomical aspects on each specimen by using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Kruskal-Wallis and pair-wise comparison were used to analyze the data (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The SEM analysis revealed smaller microgaps with Co-Cr milled abutments (0.69-8.39 μm) followed by Zr abutments (0.12-6.57 μm), Co-Cr sintered (7.31-25.7 μm) and cast Co-Cr (1.68-85.97 μm). Statistically significant differences were found between milled and cast Co-Cr, milled and laser-sintered Co-Cr, and between Zr and cast and laser-sintered Co-Cr (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The material and the abutment fabrication technique affected the implant-abutment microgap magnitude. The Zr and the milled Co-Cr presented smaller microgaps. Although the CAD/CAM abutments presented the most favorable values, all tested groups had microgaps within a range of 10 to 150 μm.