No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Aim To measure the trueness and precision under repeatable conditions for different intraoral scanners (IOSs) when scanning fully edentulous arch with multiple implants. Materials and Methods Three IOSs and one industrial scanner were used to scan one edentulous master cast containing five implant scan bodies and three spheres. The cast was scanned thirty times with each scanner device. All scans were analyzed in the inspect software, and three-dimensional locations of the implants and the interarch distance between the spheres were measured. The values were compared to measurements made with one coordinate measuring machine (true value). One-way ANOVA was used to calculate the differences between IOSs and in comparison with the true value. Results Significant differences were found between all IOSs. For the implant measurements, Trios 3 had the lowest trueness (≤114 μm), followed by Trios 3 mono (≤63 μm) and Itero element (≤−41 μm). Trios had the lowest precision (≤135 μm), followed by Itero element (≤101 μm) and Trios 3 mono (≤100 μm). With regard to the interarch distance measurements, Trios 3 had the lowest trueness (≤68 μm), followed by Trios 3 mono (≤45 μm) and Itero element (≤40 μm). Trios 3 had the lowest precision (≤206 μm), followed by Itero element (≤124 μm) and Trios 3 mono (≤111 μm). Conclusion The results from this in vitro study suggest that precision is low for the tested IOS devices when scanning fully edentulous arches with multiple implants.

Titanium or zirconium computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing abutments are now widely used for aesthetic implant treatments; however, information regarding microscopic structural differences that may influence the biological and mechanical outcomes of different implant systems is limited. Therefore, the characteristics of different connection systems were investigated. Optical microscopic observation and scanning electron microscopy showed different characteristics of two internal systems, namely the Astra Tech and the Replace Select system, and for different materials. The scanning electron microscopic observation showed for the Astra Tech that the implant-abutment interface seemed to be completely sealed for both titanium and zirconium abutments, both horizontally and sagittally; however, the first implant-abutment contact was below the fixture top, creating a microgap, and fixtures connected with titanium abutments showed significantly larger values (23·56μm±5·44 in width, and 168·78μm±30·39 in depth, P<0·001). For Replace Select, scanning electron microscopy in the sagittal direction showed that the sealing of titanium and zirconium abutments differed. The seal between the implant-titanium and implant-zirconium abutments seemed to be complete at the butt-joint interface; however, the displacement of the abutment in relation to the fixture in the lateral direction was evident for both abutments with no statistical differences (P>0·70), creating an inverted microgap. Thus, microscopy evaluation of two commonly used internal systems connected to titanium or zirconium abutments showed that the implant-abutment interface was perfectly sealed under no-loading conditions. However, an inverted microgap was seen in both systems, which may result in bacterial accumulation as well as alteration of stress distribution at the implant-abutment interface.