Could various angulated implant depths affect the positional accuracy of digital impressions? An in vitro study

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this in vitro investigation was to assess how implant depth could affect the three‐dimensional positional accuracy of digital impressions made from angulated implants.Materials and MethodsFour modified maxillary models were printed and divided into four study groups. In each model, two angulated implant analogs were placed at the sites of the first premolar and first molar at four different depths of 1 (G1), 2 (G2), 3 (G3), and 4 (G4) mm from the models' edentate area. Scan bodies were connected to the analogs, and one operator made 10 full‐arch scans for each master model using an intraoral scanner. Afterward, the marginal gingival part of all models was removed, and digital scans were performed for each model using a laboratory scanner to achieve a reference STL file as the control group. One‐way ANOVA and Leven's tests were used to measure and compare the 3D distance deviations across research groups after the superimposing test and control scans.ResultsA significant difference between research groups was revealed by trueness and precision analysis (p<.001). The trueness and precision results obtained for G1 and G4 were significantly better than those for G2 and G3 (p<.05).ConclusionThis study demonstrated that implant depth could affect the digital implant impressions' 3D positional accuracy.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Marginal fit of 3-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures: Influence of pattern fabrication method and repeated porcelain firings

“…Long-term success of dental restorations relies on several factors, including proper fit [1][2][3]. In implant-supported prostheses, poor fit can induce internal stresses on implant components and bone, promote bacterial colonization, and consequently lead to mechanical and biological failures, including screw loosening, crown debonding, fracture of different implant parts, peri-implantitis, and potential loss of osseointegration [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Although there is no consensus on the maximum clinically acceptable marginal misfit, many studies suggest 120 μm as the maximum limit in single-tooth restorations [13][14][15][16][17][18].…”