In vitro fit of CAD-CAM complete arch screw-retained titanium and zirconia implant prostheses fabricated on 4 implants.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Computer-aided designed and computer-aided manufactured (CAD-CAM) titanium and zirconia implant-supported fixed implant prostheses on 4 implants have become popular. The precision and accuracy of their interface fit has not been widely researched. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the marginal fit of zirconia and titanium implant-supported screw-retained CAD-CAM complete fixed dental prostheses (CFDP) fit with a standardized cast simulating the all-on-4 implant distribution. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Representation of an edentulous maxilla with 4 multiunit replicas embedded in sites corresponding to the positions of the maxillary first molars and canines was chosen. Multiunit abutments were digitally scanned using scan bodies and a laboratory scanner. CAD software was used to design screw-retained implant-fixed complete prostheses framework, and the file was sent to a milling machine for CAM. Titanium (n=5) and zirconia (n=5) frameworks were milled on 4 implants, and the frameworks were scanned with an industrial computed tomography (CT) scanner while applying the 1-screw test. The direct CT scans were reconstructed to generate a standard tessellation language (STL) file from the voxel data set and transported to volume graphics analysis software from which measurements were extracted. The circular mating surfaces of the corresponding framework interfaces to their representative multiunit abutment replicas on the standard were measured for implant position left maxillary canine (LMC), implant position right maxillary canine (RMC) and implant position right maxillary first molar (RMFM). In addition, color maps were generated to show the marginal discrepancy between the mating surfaces using ±0.500 mm color scale ranges. RESULTS: The material type (zirconia or titanium) was not significant for 3D discrepancy measurements (P=.904). However, 3D discrepancy measurement values were significantly different between RMC and RMFM within each group (P<.001). The mean 3D ±SD discrepancy measurement for LMC for titanium was 48.2 ±2.6 µm. The mean ±3D discrepancy measurement for RMC for titanium was 74 ±15 µm and 84.4 ±12.1 µm for zirconia. The mean 3D discrepancy measurement for RMFM for titanium was 102 ±26.7 µm and 93.8 ±30 µm for zirconia. All 3D discrepancy measurements showed values <135 µm. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the present in vitro study, implant-supported CAD-CAM fabricated titanium and zirconia complete fixed dental prosthesis frameworks showed comparable marginal fit. Three-dimensional microgap measurements of frameworks showed clinically acceptable misfit values. Absolute passive fit was not achieved.

Distortion of CAD-CAM-fabricated implant-fixed titanium and zirconia complete dental prosthesis frameworks.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM)-fabricated titanium and zirconia implant-supported fixed dental prostheses have become increasingly popular for restoring patients with complete edentulism. However, the distortion level of these frameworks is not well known. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the 3-dimensional (3D) distortion of CAD-CAM zirconia and titanium implant-fixed screw-retained complete dental prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A master edentulous model with 4 implants at the positions of the maxillary first molars and canines was used. Multiunit abutments (Nobel Biocare) secured to the model were digitally scanned using scan bodies and a laboratory scanner (S600 ARTI; Zirkonzahn). Titanium (n=5) and zirconia (n=5) frameworks were milled using a CAD-CAM system (Zirkonzahn M1; Zirkonzahn). All frameworks were scanned using an industrial computed tomography (CT) scanner (Nikon/X-Tek XT H 225kV MCT Micro-Focus). The direct CT scans were reconstructed to generate standard tessellation language (STL) files. To calculate the 3D distortion of the frameworks, STL files of the CT scans were aligned to the CAD model using a sum of the least squares best-fit algorithm. Surface comparison points were placed on the CAD model on the midfacial aspect of all teeth. The 3D distortion of each direct scan to the CAD model was calculated. In addition, color maps of the scan-to-CAD comparison were constructed using a ±0.500 mm color scale range. RESULTS: Both materials exhibited distortion; however, no significant difference was found in the amount of distortion from the CAD model between the materials (P=.747). Absolute values of deviations from the CAD model were evident in the x and y plane and less so in the z direction. CONCLUSIONS: Zirconia and titanium frameworks showed similar 3D distortion compared with the CAD model for the tested CAD-CAM and implant systems. The distortion was more pronounced in the horizontal and sagittal plane than in the vertical plane.