• H Alshehri, H Alotaibi, N Alshareef, N Alsenani, L Aljuma'ah, Waled Alshhrani, and A Alsahhaf.
• Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
• Niger J Clin Pract. 2022 Feb 1; 25 (2): 185-191.

BackgroundImplant supported prosthesis is a common treatment modality. Nowadays, new manufacturing techniques are available to fabricate them.AimsTo evaluate the effect of different manufacturing techniques of implant supported frameworks (ISF) on the preload of abutment's screws.Materials And MethodsA mandibular edentulous acrylic model with four dental implants temporarily stabilized in the interforaminal area was used. One ISF was fabricated using the conventional technique; implants were removed from the model and reassembled into the framework; this framework served as the passively fitting framework (PF). Three additional frameworks were constructed: conventional cast framework (CF), milled framework (MF) and 3D-printed framework (3D-PF). The gap between the frameworks and the neck of the implants were recorded in microns using a digital microscope. A tightening torque (TT) of 35 N·cm was applied to all the four abutments' screws and the screw's preload was recorded using two methods, by strain gauges (SGs) that were attached to the neck of each implant and fed into a stain book in microstrain (μɛ) and by removal torque (RT) using a digital torque meter.ResultsThe frameworks' gap means from the lowest to the highest were PF, CF, 3D-PF, and MF. The RT was significantly lower than the TT in all frameworks (P ≤ 0.05). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that the PF had the lowest RT, while the CF and the 3DPF both had the highest RT, and those differences were found to be statistically significantly (P ≤ 0.05). When preload of the frameworks was recorded by SGs, one-way ANOVA revealed that PF had the highest preload value, while both 3D-PF and MF had the lowest preload values, those differences were also found to be statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05).ConclusionThe fabrication of implant-supported frameworks using milling or selective laser melting computer aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technologies did not necessarily enhance the screw's preload. This lack of enhancement could be attributed to the great amount of marginal gap in the frameworks fabricated by both techniques.

11 keywords...

hide…