Stress Over Implants of One-Piece Cast Frameworks Made With Different Materials.

This study aims to compare stress transmitted to implants and passive fit of one-piece cast frameworks fabricated with 3 different materials: commercially pure titanium (G1-CP Ti), cobalt-chromium alloy (G2-Co-Cr), and nickel-chromium-titanium alloy (G3-Ni-Cr-Ti). In total, 12 frameworks simulating bars for fixed prosthesis in a model with 5 implants were fabricated. The passive fit of the framework interface was measured using an optical microscope and the stresses transmitted to implants were measured using quantitative photoelastic analysis. Data were statistically analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and least significant difference (LSD) tests (α = 0.05). Mean and standard deviation values of passive fit and stress over implants are presented, respectively: G1 [472.49 (109.88) µm and 11.38 (9.23) KPa], G2 [584.84 (120.20) µm and 15.83 (9.30) KPa], and G3 [462.70 (179.18) µm and 16.39 (9.51) KPa]. For stress over implants, there were significant differences between G1, G2, and G3 (P = 0.035), being the lowest values for the G1. There were no significant differences for passive fit between G1 and G3 (P = 0.844), but both were statistically different from G2 (P = 0.028 and P = 0.035, respectively), which showed the worse results. It may be concluded that the stress over implants was affected by the tested materials. The CP Ti presented the best values for the evaluated items.

Passivity of conventional and CAD/CAM fabricated implant frameworks.

The objective of this research was to evaluate the passivity by measuring the passive fit and strain development of frameworks screwed on abutments, made by CAD/CAM technology, and to compare these parts with samples manufactured by conventional casting. Using CAD/CAM technology, four samples were made from zirconia (Zircad) and four samples were manufactured from cobalt-chrome (CoCrcad). The control groups were four specimens of cobalt-chrome, made by one-piece casting (CoCrci), with a total of 12 frameworks. To evaluate the passive fit, the vertical misfit at the abutment-framework interface was measured with scanning electron microscopy (250×) when only one screw was tightened. The mean strain in these frameworks was analyzed by photoelasticity test. A significant difference in the passive fit was observed between the control and sample groups. CoCrcad exhibited the best value of passive fit (48.76±13.45 µm) and CoCrci the worst (187.55±103.63 µm); Zircad presented an intermediate value (103.81±43.15 µm). When compared to the other groups, CoCrci showed the highest average stress around the implants (17.19±7.22 kPa). It was concluded that CAD/CAM-fabricated frameworks exhibited better passivity compared with conventionally fabricated frameworks. CAD/CAM-fabricated Co-Cr frameworks may exhibit better passive fit compared with CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia frameworks. Even so, similar levels of stress were achieved for CAD/CAM-fabricated frameworks.

Correlation between vertical misfits and stresses over implants from castable frameworks made of different alloys.

This study aims to investigate a possible correlation between vertical misfits and the stresses transmitted to implants from one-piece casted frameworks fabricated with 3 different materials: commercially pure titanium, cobalt chromium alloy, and nickel chromium titanium alloy. Twelve frameworks simulating screw-retained prosthesis were fabricated from a master cast with 5 implants. Each framework was screwed (20 Ncm) over a metal cast and the vertical mesial and distal misfits were measured using an optical microscope. The stresses transmitted to the implants were measured in a third model by a quantitative photoelastic analysis. Stress and vertical misfit data were statistically analyzed by ANOVA and least significant difference tests and the correlation tests were performed using Pearson Correlation Test (α = 0.05). Mean and standard deviation values of vertical misfit and stress over implants are presented, respectively: commercially pure titanium (29.09 ± 13.24 µm and 11.38 ± 9.23 kPa), cobalt chromium alloy (27.05 ± 10.30 µm and 15.83 ± 9.30 kPa), nickel chromium titanium alloy (24.95 ± 11.14 µm and 16.39 ± 9.51 kPa). There were no significant differences for vertical misfit (P = 0.285). Regarding the stress analysis, there were significant differences between commercially pure titanium, cobalt chromium alloy, and nickel chromium titanium alloy (P = 0.035), with the lowest values for the commercially pure titanium. It may be concluded that stress over implants was affected by different procedures and materials for framework production.