A microstrain comparison of passively fitting screw-retained and cemented titanium frameworks.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM An imprecise fit between frameworks and supporting dental implants in loaded protocols increases the strain transferred to the periimplant bone, which may impair healing or generate microgaps. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to investigate the microstrain between premachined 1-piece screw-retained frameworks (group STF) and screw-retained frameworks fabricated by cementing titanium cylinders to the prefabricated framework (group CTF). This procedure was developed to correct the misfit between frameworks and loaded implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS Four internal hexagon cylindrical implants were placed 10 mm apart in a polyurethane block by using the surgical guides of the corresponding implant system. Previously fabricated titanium frameworks (n=10) were divided into 2 groups. In group STF, prefabricated machined frameworks were used (n=5), and, in group CTF, the frameworks were fabricated by using a passive fit procedure, which was developed to correct the misfit between the cast titanium frameworks and supporting dental implants (n=5). Both groups were screw-retained under torque control (10 Ncm). Six strain gauges were placed on the upper surface of the polyurethane block, and 3 strain measurements were recorded for each framework. Data were analyzed with the Student t test (α=.05). RESULTS The mean microstrain values between the framework and the implants were significantly higher for group STF (2517 mε) than for group CTF (844 mε) (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS Complete-arch implant frameworks designed for load application and fabricated by using the passive fit procedure decreased the strain between the frameworks and implants more than 1 piece prefabricated machined frameworks.