CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs

Joannis Katsoulis, Philipp Müller, Regina Mericske-Stern, Markus B. Blatz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the precision of fit of long-span vs. short-span implant-supported screw-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) made from computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) titanium and veneered with ceramic. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference in the vertical microgap between long-span and short-span FDPs. Materials and methods: CAD/CAM titanium frameworks for an implant-supported maxillary FDP on implants with a flat platform were fabricated on one single master cast. Group A consisted of six 10-unit FDPs connected to six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) and group B of six 5-unit FDPs (three implants, FDI positions 21, 23, 25). The CAD/CAM system from Biodenta Swiss AG (Berneck, Switzerland) was used for digitizing (laser scanner) the master cast and anatomical CAD of each framework separately. The frameworks were milled (CAM) from a titanium grade V monobloc and veneered with porcelain. Median vertical distance between implant and FDP platforms from the non-tightened implants (one-screw test on implant 25) was calculated from mesial, buccal, and distal scanning electron microscope measurements. Results: All measurements showed values <40 μm. Total median vertical microgaps were 23 μm (range 2-38 μm) for group A and 7 μm (4-24 μm) for group B. The difference between the groups was statistically significant at implant 21 (P = 0.002; 97.5% CI -27.3 to -4.9) and insignificant at implant 23 (P = 0.093; -3.9 to 1.0). Conclusions: CAD/CAM fabrication including laboratory scanning and porcelain firing was highly precise and reproducible for all long- and short-span FDPs. While all FDPs showed clinically acceptable values, the short-span FDPs were statistically more precise at the 5-unit span distance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)245-249
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Oral Implants Research
Volume26
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Implant-Supported Dental Prosthesis
Dental Prosthesis
Computer-Aided Design
Titanium
Dental Porcelain
Cheek
Ceramics
Switzerland
Prostheses and Implants
Lasers
Electrons

Keywords

  • CAD/CAM
  • Fixed dental prosthesis FDP
  • Framework misfit
  • Implant-supported
  • Long-span
  • Passive fit
  • Short-span

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oral Surgery

Cite this

CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs. / Katsoulis, Joannis; Müller, Philipp; Mericske-Stern, Regina; Blatz, Markus B.

In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, Vol. 26, No. 3, 01.03.2015, p. 245-249.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Katsoulis, J, Müller, P, Mericske-Stern, R & Blatz, MB 2015, 'CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs', Clinical Oral Implants Research, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 245-249. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12522
Katsoulis, Joannis ; Müller, Philipp ; Mericske-Stern, Regina ; Blatz, Markus B. / CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs. In: Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2015 ; Vol. 26, No. 3. pp. 245-249.
@article{d91da0d597f346d99e4acd6fe2ebc2e0,
title = "CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the precision of fit of long-span vs. short-span implant-supported screw-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) made from computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) titanium and veneered with ceramic. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference in the vertical microgap between long-span and short-span FDPs. Materials and methods: CAD/CAM titanium frameworks for an implant-supported maxillary FDP on implants with a flat platform were fabricated on one single master cast. Group A consisted of six 10-unit FDPs connected to six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) and group B of six 5-unit FDPs (three implants, FDI positions 21, 23, 25). The CAD/CAM system from Biodenta Swiss AG (Berneck, Switzerland) was used for digitizing (laser scanner) the master cast and anatomical CAD of each framework separately. The frameworks were milled (CAM) from a titanium grade V monobloc and veneered with porcelain. Median vertical distance between implant and FDP platforms from the non-tightened implants (one-screw test on implant 25) was calculated from mesial, buccal, and distal scanning electron microscope measurements. Results: All measurements showed values <40 μm. Total median vertical microgaps were 23 μm (range 2-38 μm) for group A and 7 μm (4-24 μm) for group B. The difference between the groups was statistically significant at implant 21 (P = 0.002; 97.5{\%} CI -27.3 to -4.9) and insignificant at implant 23 (P = 0.093; -3.9 to 1.0). Conclusions: CAD/CAM fabrication including laboratory scanning and porcelain firing was highly precise and reproducible for all long- and short-span FDPs. While all FDPs showed clinically acceptable values, the short-span FDPs were statistically more precise at the 5-unit span distance.",
keywords = "CAD/CAM, Fixed dental prosthesis FDP, Framework misfit, Implant-supported, Long-span, Passive fit, Short-span",
author = "Joannis Katsoulis and Philipp M{\"u}ller and Regina Mericske-Stern and Blatz, {Markus B.}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/clr.12522",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "245--249",
journal = "Clinical Oral Implants Research",
issn = "0905-7161",
publisher = "Blackwell Munksgaard",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs

AU - Katsoulis, Joannis

AU - Müller, Philipp

AU - Mericske-Stern, Regina

AU - Blatz, Markus B.

PY - 2015/3/1

Y1 - 2015/3/1

N2 - Objective: To compare the precision of fit of long-span vs. short-span implant-supported screw-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) made from computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) titanium and veneered with ceramic. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference in the vertical microgap between long-span and short-span FDPs. Materials and methods: CAD/CAM titanium frameworks for an implant-supported maxillary FDP on implants with a flat platform were fabricated on one single master cast. Group A consisted of six 10-unit FDPs connected to six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) and group B of six 5-unit FDPs (three implants, FDI positions 21, 23, 25). The CAD/CAM system from Biodenta Swiss AG (Berneck, Switzerland) was used for digitizing (laser scanner) the master cast and anatomical CAD of each framework separately. The frameworks were milled (CAM) from a titanium grade V monobloc and veneered with porcelain. Median vertical distance between implant and FDP platforms from the non-tightened implants (one-screw test on implant 25) was calculated from mesial, buccal, and distal scanning electron microscope measurements. Results: All measurements showed values <40 μm. Total median vertical microgaps were 23 μm (range 2-38 μm) for group A and 7 μm (4-24 μm) for group B. The difference between the groups was statistically significant at implant 21 (P = 0.002; 97.5% CI -27.3 to -4.9) and insignificant at implant 23 (P = 0.093; -3.9 to 1.0). Conclusions: CAD/CAM fabrication including laboratory scanning and porcelain firing was highly precise and reproducible for all long- and short-span FDPs. While all FDPs showed clinically acceptable values, the short-span FDPs were statistically more precise at the 5-unit span distance.

AB - Objective: To compare the precision of fit of long-span vs. short-span implant-supported screw-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) made from computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) titanium and veneered with ceramic. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference in the vertical microgap between long-span and short-span FDPs. Materials and methods: CAD/CAM titanium frameworks for an implant-supported maxillary FDP on implants with a flat platform were fabricated on one single master cast. Group A consisted of six 10-unit FDPs connected to six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) and group B of six 5-unit FDPs (three implants, FDI positions 21, 23, 25). The CAD/CAM system from Biodenta Swiss AG (Berneck, Switzerland) was used for digitizing (laser scanner) the master cast and anatomical CAD of each framework separately. The frameworks were milled (CAM) from a titanium grade V monobloc and veneered with porcelain. Median vertical distance between implant and FDP platforms from the non-tightened implants (one-screw test on implant 25) was calculated from mesial, buccal, and distal scanning electron microscope measurements. Results: All measurements showed values <40 μm. Total median vertical microgaps were 23 μm (range 2-38 μm) for group A and 7 μm (4-24 μm) for group B. The difference between the groups was statistically significant at implant 21 (P = 0.002; 97.5% CI -27.3 to -4.9) and insignificant at implant 23 (P = 0.093; -3.9 to 1.0). Conclusions: CAD/CAM fabrication including laboratory scanning and porcelain firing was highly precise and reproducible for all long- and short-span FDPs. While all FDPs showed clinically acceptable values, the short-span FDPs were statistically more precise at the 5-unit span distance.

KW - CAD/CAM

KW - Fixed dental prosthesis FDP

KW - Framework misfit

KW - Implant-supported

KW - Long-span

KW - Passive fit

KW - Short-span

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922754436&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84922754436&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/clr.12522

DO - 10.1111/clr.12522

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 245

EP - 249

JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research

JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research

SN - 0905-7161

IS - 3

ER -