Evaluation of Milled Titanium Versus Laser Sintered Co-Cr Abutments on the Marginal Misfit in Internal Implant-Abutment Connection

Overview

Journal Materials (Basel)

Publisher MDPI

Date 2020 Nov 4

PMID 33143092

Citations 7

Authors

Esther Gonzalo

Beatriz Vizoso

Carlos Lopez-Suarez

Pedro Diaz

Jesus Pelaez

Maria J Suarez

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The precision of fit at the implant-abutment connection is an important criterion for the clinical success of restorations and implants. Several factors are involved among which are the abutment materials and manufacturing techniques. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of two materials and methods of manufacturing implant abutments, milled titanium versus laser sintered Co-Cr, on the marginal misfit at the implant-abutment interface. Scanning electron microscopes (SEM) were used to geometrically measure the marginal vertical discrepancy of a total of 80 specimens, classified into eight categories, according to the implant system and abutment. The data were statistically analyzed by Student's paired t test, one-way and two-way ANOVA with the Bonferroni-Holm correction at the significance level of = 0.05. Milled titanium abutments demonstrated the lowest misfit values in the implant systems analyzed. The marginal fit of all the groups was within the clinically acceptable range for implant prostheses.

Citing Articles

Effect of polishing process on torque loss ratio and microgap of selective laser melting abutment: an in vitro study.

Zhong P, Deng L, Xu S, Cao Y BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):1055.

PMID: 39251975 PMC: 11386349. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04829-y.

Accuracy of fit for cobaltchromium bar over two implants fabricated with different manufacturing techniques: an in-vitro study.

Nassar H, Fateen A BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):946.

PMID: 38031111 PMC: 10688085. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03700-w.

Influence of the Use of Transepithelial Abutments vs. Titanium Base Abutments on Microgap Formation at the Dental Implant-Abutment Interface: An In Vitro Study.

Cascos R, Celemin-Vinuela A, Mory-Rubinos N, Gomez-Polo C, Ortega R, Agustin-Panadero R Materials (Basel). 2023; 16(19).

PMID: 37834669 PMC: 10573618. DOI: 10.3390/ma16196532.

Evaluation of customized cobalt-chromium abutments fabricated with different manufacturing process versus titanium stock abutments on the marginal misfit -An study.

Sutradhar W, Mishra S, Chowdhary R J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2022; 22(3):225-232.

PMID: 36511051 PMC: 9416951. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_381_21.

The effect of the digital manufacturing technique of cantilevered implant-supported frameworks on abutment screw preload.

Altuwaijri S, Alotaibi H, Alnassar T J Adv Prosthodont. 2022; 14(1):22-31.

PMID: 35284054 PMC: 8891687. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2022.14.1.22.

References

Trullenque-Eriksson A, Guisado-Moya B . Retrospective long-term evaluation of dental implants in totally and partially edentulous patients. Part I: survival and marginal bone loss. Implant Dent. 2014; 23(6):732-7. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000171. View

Broggini N, McManus L, Hermann J, Medina R, Schenk R, Buser D . Peri-implant inflammation defined by the implant-abutment interface. J Dent Res. 2006; 85(5):473-8. DOI: 10.1177/154405910608500515. View

Butignon L, de Almeida Basilio M, Santo J, Arioli Filho J . Vertical Misfit of Single-Implant Abutments Made from Different Materials Under Cyclic Loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016; 31(5):1017-22. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.4477. View

Revilla-Leon M, Sanchez-Rubio J, Perez-Lopez J, Rubenstein J, Ozcan M . Discrepancy at the implant abutment-prosthesis interface of complete-arch cobalt-chromium implant frameworks fabricated by additive and subtractive technologies before and after ceramic veneering. J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 125(5):795-803. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.018. View

Gonzalo E, Suarez M, Serrano B, Lozano J . A comparison of the marginal vertical discrepancies of zirconium and metal ceramic posterior fixed dental prostheses before and after cementation. J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 102(6):378-84. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60198-0. View

Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark P . A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg. 1981; 10(6):387-416. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-9785(81)80077-4. View

Jung R, Zembic A, Pjetursson B, Zwahlen M, Thoma D . Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23 Suppl 6:2-21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02547.x. View

Suleiman S, Vult von Steyern P . Fracture strength of porcelain fused to metal crowns made of cast, milled or laser-sintered cobalt-chromium. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013; 71(5):1280-9. DOI: 10.3109/00016357.2012.757650. View

Smith N, Turkyilmaz I . Evaluation of the sealing capability of implants to titanium and zirconia abutments against Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Fusobacterium nucleatum under different screw torque values. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112(3):561-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.11.010. View

10.

Kano S, Binon P, Curtis D . A classification system to measure the implant-abutment microgap. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008; 22(6):879-85. View

11.

Siadat H, Beyabanaki E, Mousavi N, Alikhasi M . Comparison of fit accuracy and torque maintenance of zirconia and titanium abutments for internal tri-channel and external-hex implant connections. J Adv Prosthodont. 2017; 9(4):271-277. PMC: 5582093. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2017.9.4.271. View

12.

Abduo J, Lyons K, Bennani V, Waddell N, Swain M . Fit of screw-retained fixed implant frameworks fabricated by different methods: a systematic review. Int J Prosthodont. 2011; 24(3):207-20. View

13.

Hjalmarsson L, Ortorp A, Smedberg J, Jemt T . Precision of fit to implants: a comparison of Cresco™ and Procera® implant bridge frameworks. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2009; 12(4):271-80. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00171.x. View

14.

de Franca D, Morais M, das Neves F, Barbosa G . Influence of CAD/CAM on the fit accuracy of implant-supported zirconia and cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 113(1):22-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.07.010. View

15.

Larrucea Verdugo C, Jaramillo Nunez G, Acevedo Avila A, Larrucea San Martin C . Microleakage of the prosthetic abutment/implant interface with internal and external connection: in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 25(9):1078-83. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12217. View

16.

Holmes J, Bayne S, Holland G, Sulik W . Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62(4):405-8. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90170-4. View

17.

Groten M, Axmann D, Probster L, Weber H . Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in-vitro testing. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83(1):40-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70087-4. View

18.

Manfredini D, Winocur E, Guarda-Nardini L, Paesani D, Lobbezoo F . Epidemiology of bruxism in adults: a systematic review of the literature. J Orofac Pain. 2013; 27(2):99-110. DOI: 10.11607/jop.921. View

19.

Tsuge T, Hagiwara Y, Matsumura H . Marginal fit and microgaps of implant-abutment interface with internal anti-rotation configuration. Dent Mater J. 2008; 27(1):29-34. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.27.29. View

20.

de Torres E, Rodrigues R, De Mattos M, Ribeiro R . The effect of commercially pure titanium and alternative dental alloys on the marginal fit of one-piece cast implant frameworks. J Dent. 2007; 35(10):800-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.07.013. View