OBJECTIVE: To analyze the precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) zirconium dioxide (ZrO) frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured ZrO frameworks (NobelProcera) for a screw-retained 10-unit implant-supported reconstruction on six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) were fabricated using a laser (ZrO-L, N = 6) and a mechanical scanner (ZrO-M, N = 5) for digitizing the implant platform and the cuspid-supporting framework resin pattern. Laser-scanned CAD/CAM titanium (TIT-L, N = 6) and cast CoCrW-alloy frameworks (Cast, N = 5) fabricated on the same model and designed similar to the ZrO frameworks were the control. The one-screw test (implant 25 screw-retained) was applied to assess the vertical microgap between implant and framework platform with a scanning electron microscope. The mean microgap was calculated from approximal and buccal values. Statistical comparison was performed with non-parametric tests. RESULTS: No statistically significant pairwise difference was observed between the relative effects of vertical microgap between ZrO-L (median 14 μm; 95% CI 10-26 μm), ZrO-M (18 μm; 12-27 μm) and TIT-L (15 μm; 6-18 μm), whereas the values of Cast (236 μm; 181-301 μm) were significantly higher (P < 0.001) than the three CAD/CAM groups. A monotonous trend of increasing values from implant 23 to 15 was observed in all groups (ZrO-L, ZrO-M and Cast P < 0.001, TIT-L P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Optical and tactile scanners with CAD/CAM technology allow for the fabrication of highly accurate long-span screw-retained ZrO implant-reconstructions. Titanium frameworks showed the most consistent precision. Fit of the cast alloy frameworks was clinically inacceptable.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) zirconium dioxide (ZrO) frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured ZrO frameworks (NobelProcera) for a screw-retained 10-unit implant-supported reconstruction on six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) were fabricated using a laser (ZrO-L, N = 6) and a mechanical scanner (ZrO-M, N = 5) for digitizing the implant platform and the cuspid-supporting framework resin pattern. Laser-scanned CAD/CAMtitanium (TIT-L, N = 6) and cast CoCrW-alloy frameworks (Cast, N = 5) fabricated on the same model and designed similar to the ZrO frameworks were the control. The one-screw test (implant 25 screw-retained) was applied to assess the vertical microgap between implant and framework platform with a scanning electron microscope. The mean microgap was calculated from approximal and buccal values. Statistical comparison was performed with non-parametric tests. RESULTS: No statistically significant pairwise difference was observed between the relative effects of vertical microgap between ZrO-L (median 14 μm; 95% CI 10-26 μm), ZrO-M (18 μm; 12-27 μm) and TIT-L (15 μm; 6-18 μm), whereas the values of Cast (236 μm; 181-301 μm) were significantly higher (P < 0.001) than the three CAD/CAM groups. A monotonous trend of increasing values from implant 23 to 15 was observed in all groups (ZrO-L, ZrO-M and Cast P < 0.001, TIT-L P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Optical and tactile scanners with CAD/CAM technology allow for the fabrication of highly accurate long-span screw-retained ZrO implant-reconstructions. Titanium frameworks showed the most consistent precision. Fit of the cast alloy frameworks was clinically inacceptable.