Solid index and reverse implant library for the fabrication of a bar for overdenture: a proof of concept.

OBJECTIVES: To present a solid index (SI), a 3D-printed replica of a patient's preexisting complete denture, which allows the dentist to accurately capture the position of the implants and the dental technician to model a bar for overdenture (OD) in CAD software with the use of reverse implant libraries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A patient in need of rehabilitation of a fully edentulous mandible was restored with an implant OD supported by a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) milled bar. The position of the implants was captured through a physical impression using an SI, with the transfers screwed in. The analogs were then connected, and the SI was scanned upside down to directly capture the position of the implants in the space. This scan was used to design the bar in CAD software using reverse implant libraries, without the need for pouring any SI-derived cast or for using any scanbody. The bar was milled in PEEK. RESULTS: When delivered to the patient, the bar was clinically precise, screwing perfectly onto the implants without any tension or misfit. CONCLUSIONS: The present proof-of-concept article supports the use of an SI and reverse implant libraries for the fabrication of a bar for OD. Further clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.

Solid index versus intraoral scanners in the full-arch implant impression: in vitro trueness evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the trueness of a solid index (SI) in the full-arch (FA) implant impression, and to compare it with that of two intraoral scanners (IOSs). A type-IV gypsum model of a completely edentulous patient with 8 implant scanbodies (SBs) was scanned with a desktop scanner (7Series®) to obtain a reference virtual model (RVM), and with two IOSs (CS 3700® and Emerald S®). Five scans were taken with each IOS. Based on the RVM, an SI (custom tray consisting of hollow cylinders connected by a bar) was fabricated and used to capture a physical impression of the model; from this, a second gypsum model was derived and scanned with a desktop scanner (D15®). The SI-derived and the IOSs-derived models were superimposed onto the RVM, to evaluate trueness. RESULTS: The overall mean trueness was 29 µm (± 26) for the SI-derived model, versus 42.4 µm (± 14.7) for CS 3700® and 52.2 µm (± 4.6) for Emerald S®. Despite its limitations (in vitro design, a limited number of models evaluated, RVM captured with a desktop scanner) this study supports the use of SI for FA implant impressions. Further studies are needed to confirm this evidence.