These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Influence of CAD/CAM on the fit accuracy of implant-supported zirconia and cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses.
    Author: de França DG, Morais MH, das Neves FD, Barbosa GA.
    Journal: J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Jan; 113(1):22-8. PubMed ID: 25277028.
    Abstract:
    STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Relatively little information is available on the accuracy of the abutment-implant interface in computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)-fabricated zirconia and cobalt-chromium frameworks. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the fit accuracy of CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia and cobalt-chromium frameworks and conventionally fabricated cobalt-chromium frameworks. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four groups of 3-unit, implant-supported, screw-retained frameworks were fabricated to fit an in vitro model with 3 implants. Eight frameworks were fabricated with the CAD/CAM system: 4 in zirconia and 4 in cobalt-chromium. Another 8 were cast in cobalt-chromium with conventional casting, including 4 with premachined abutments and 4 with castable abutments. The vertical misfit at the implant-framework interface was measured with scanning electron microscopy when only 1 screw was tightened and when all screws were tightened. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests (α=.05). RESULTS: The mean vertical misfit values when all screws were tightened was 5.9 ±3.6 μm for CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia, 1.2 ±2.2 μm for CAD/CAM-fabricated cobalt-chromium frameworks, 11.8 ±9.8 μm for conventionally fabricated cobalt-chromium frameworks with premachined abutments, and 12.9 ±11.0 μm for the conventionally fabricated frameworks with castable abutments; the Mann-Whitney test found significant differences (P<.05) among all frameworks, except between the conventionally fabricated frameworks (P=.619). No significant differences were found among the groups for passive fit gap measurements (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: When all of the screws were tightened, the CAD/CAM frameworks exhibited better fit accuracy compared with the conventionally fabricated frameworks. High levels of passive fit were achieved for the evaluated techniques.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]