In vitro measurements of precision of fit of implant-supported frameworks. A comparison between "virtual" and "physical" assessments of fit using two different techniques of measurements.

BACKGROUND Comparisons between different techniques measuring fit of implant-supported frameworks are few. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare data on precision of fit from two highly accurate measuring techniques and, also, to compare results using software programs for fit assessments considering both a "virtual" as well as a "physical" (i.e., more clinical) situation. MATERIALS AND METHODS Five computer numerical control-milled titanium frameworks (Procera Implant Bridge, Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) were fabricated from individual model/pattern measurements, simulating a clinical situation. Measurements of fit between frameworks and models were performed by means of a coordinate measuring machine (CMM; Zeiss Prismo Vast, Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH, Oberkochen, Germany) linked to a computer and an optical, high-resolution, three-dimensional scanner (Atos 4M SO, GOM International AG, Widen, Switzerland). Collected data on distortions between frameworks and models were analyzed and compared between the two measurement techniques. A comparison between "virtual" and "physical" fit assessments was also performed, based on data from the three-dimensional scanner. RESULTS When using "virtual" fit assessment programs, overall mean three-dimensional distortion between implant and framework center points in absolute figures was 37 (SD 22) and 14 µm (SD 8) for the CMM and three-dimensional scanning measurements, respectively. Corresponding mean three-dimensional distortion when using a "physical" fit assessment program in the scanner was 43 µm (SD 24) (p < 0.001). Mean horizontal (x-axis) measurements of the distance between the two terminal implants of the models and the frameworks were 33.772 and 33.834 mm for the CMM technique. Corresponding measurements for the three-dimensional scanner was 33.798 and 33.806 mm, respectively. Horizontal distances from the three-dimensional scanner were, for most measurements, greater than for the CMM measurements. CONCLUSION Measurements of fit between frameworks and models may vary depending on what technique is used and how fit assessments regarding "virtual" or "physical" fit is approached.

[1]  Matthias Karl,et al.  In vitro study on passive fit in implant-supported 5-unit fixed partial dentures. , 2004, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[2]  B. Stegenga,et al.  Feasibility and influence of the microgap of two implants placed in a non-submerged procedure: a five-year follow-up clinical trial. , 2006, Journal of periodontology.

[3]  Torsten Jemt,et al.  Comparisons of precision of fit between cast and CNC-milled titanium implant frameworks for the edentulous mandible. , 2003, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[4]  T. Jemt,et al.  Precision of fit to implants: a comparison of Cresco™ and Procera® implant bridge frameworks. , 2010, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[5]  T. Jemt,et al.  Accuracy of implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous jaw: analysis of precision of fit between cast gold-alloy frameworks and master casts by means of a three-dimensional photogrammetric technique. , 1995, Clinical oral implants research.

[6]  T Jemt,et al.  Prosthesis misfit and marginal bone loss in edentulous implant patients. , 1996, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[7]  Torsten Jemt,et al.  Photogrammetry and conventional impressions for recording implant positions: a comparative laboratory study. , 2005, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[8]  George A Zarb,et al.  A comparison of the accuracy of fit of 2 methods for fabricating implant-prosthodontic frameworks. , 2007, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[9]  Daniel Wismeijer,et al.  Parameters of passive fit using a new technique to mill implant-supported superstructures: an in vitro study of a novel three-dimensional force measurement-misfit method. , 2010, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[10]  M Sherriff,et al.  Measurement of misfit at the implant-prosthesis interface: an experimental method using a coordinate measuring machine. , 2000, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[11]  Toshiyuki Takahashi,et al.  Fit of implant frameworks: an in vitro comparison between two fabrication techniques. , 2003, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[12]  T Jemt,et al.  Three-dimensional distortion of gold alloy castings and welded titanium frameworks. Measurements of the precision of fit between completed implant prostheses and the master casts in routine edentulous situations. , 1995, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[13]  U. Koke,et al.  In vitro investigation of marginal accuracy of implant-supported screw-retained partial dentures. , 2004, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[14]  T Jemt,et al.  Precision of CNC-milled titanium frameworks for implant treatment in the edentulous jaw. , 1999, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[15]  B R Lang,et al.  Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit. , 1999, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[16]  M. McCracken,et al.  Comparison of the passivity between cast alloy and laser-welded titanium overdenture bars. , 2009, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[17]  Karl Lyons,et al.  Assessing the fit of implant fixed prostheses: a critical review. , 2010, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[18]  P. Vigolo,et al.  Evaluation of the accuracy of three techniques used for multiple implant abutment impressions. , 2003, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[19]  M. Çehreli,et al.  The Significance Of Passive Framework Fit In Implant Prosthodontics: Current Status , 2001, Implant Dentistry.

[20]  T. Jemt.  Measurements of tooth movements in relation to single-implant restorations during 16 years: a case report. , 2005, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[21]  Torsten Jemt,et al.  The precision of fit of milled titanium implant frameworks (I-Bridge) in the edentulous jaw. , 2008, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[22]  D. Kohavi.  Complications in the tissue integrated prostheses components: clinical and mechanical evaluation. , 1993, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[23]  U. Lekholm,et al.  Single implants and buccal bone grafts in the anterior maxilla: measurements of buccal crestal contours in a 6-year prospective clinical study. , 2005, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[24]  D. Cochran,et al.  Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. , 1997, Journal of periodontology.

[25]  R. Ribeiro,et al.  The effect of commercially pure titanium and alternative dental alloys on the marginal fit of one-piece cast implant frameworks. , 2007, Journal of dentistry.

[26]  S. Glantz,et al.  On the influence of superstructure connection on implant preload: a methodological and clinical study. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[27]  T D Taylor,et al.  Implant prosthodontics: current perspective and future directions. , 2000, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[28]  T Jemt,et al.  In vivo measurements of precision of fit involving implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous jaw. , 1996, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[29]  Per Vult von Steyern,et al.  The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a comparative in vitro study. , 2011, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[30]  B R Lang,et al.  Measuring fit at the implant prosthodontic interface. , 1996, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[31]  G C Michaels,et al.  Effect of prosthetic superstructure accuracy on the osteointegrated implant bone interface. , 1997, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[32]  T Jemt,et al.  Photogrammetric measurements of implant positions. Description of a technique to determine the fit between implants and superstructures. , 1994, Clinical oral implants research.

[33]  D. Gratton,et al.  An in vitro comparison of vertical marginal gaps of CAD/CAM titanium and conventional cast restorations. , 2008, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[34]  C Bessing,et al.  Loose gold screws frequently occur in full-arch fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants after 5 years. , 1994, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[35]  S A Aquilino,et al.  Strategies to achieve fit in implant prosthodontics: a review of the literature. , 1999, The International journal of prosthodontics.