Over the past decades, the technological development in the medical field, coupled with the ongoing scientific research, has led to the development and improvement of dental prostheses supported by screw-retained metal frameworks. A key point in the manufacture of the framework is the achievement of a passive fit, intended as the capability of an implant-supported reconstruction to transmit minimum strain to implant components as well as to the surrounding bone, when subject to any load. The fitting of four different kinds of screw-retained metal frameworks was tested in this article. They differ both in materials and manufacturing process: two frameworks are made by casting, one framework is made by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing and one framework is made by electric resistance spot welding (WeldONE, DENTSPLY Implants Manufacturing GmbH, Mannheim, Germany). The passivity of the frameworks was evaluated on the entire system, composed of a resin master cast, the implant analogues embedded in the cast and the frameworks. Strains were recorded by means of an electrical strain gauge connected to a control unit for strain gauge measurements. The experimental tests were carried out in the laboratories of the Department of INdustrial engineering at the University of Bologna. The results of the test campaigns, which compared three samples for each technological process, showed that no significant differences exist between the four framework types. In particular, the frameworks made by the resistance welding approach led to a mechanical response that is well comparable to that of the other tested frameworks.
KanJYRungcharassaengKBohsaliK. Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit. J Prosthet Dent1999; 81(1): 7–13.
2.
RomeroGGEngelmeierRPowersJM. Accuracy of three corrective techniques for implant bar fabrication. J Prosthet Dent2000; 84(6): 602–607.
3.
BuzayanMMYunusNB.Passive fit in screw retained multi-unit implant prosthesis understanding and achieving: a review of the literature. J Indian Prosthodont Soc2014; 14(1): 16–23.
4.
AbduoJBennaniVWaddellN. Assessing the fit of implant fixed prostheses: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants2010; 25: 506–515.
5.
SahinSÇehreliMC.The significance of passive framework fit in implant prosthodontics: current status. Implant Dent2001; 10(2): 85–92.
6.
SahinSCereliMCYalçinE.The influence of functional forces on the biomechanics of implant-supported prostheses – a review. J Dent2002; 30: 271–282.
7.
Szmukler-MonclerSSalamaHReingewirtzY. Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone-dental implant interface: review of experimental literature. J Biomed Mater Res1998; 43: 192–203.
8.
HeckerDEckertS.Cyclic loading of implant-supported prostheses: changes in component fit over time. J Prosthet Dent2003; 89: 346–351.
HobkirkJASchwabJ.Mandibular deformation in subjects with osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants1991; 6(3): 319–328.
11.
YanaseRBinonPJemtT. How do you test a cast framework fit for a full-arch fixed implant-supported prosthesis?Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants1994; 9: 469–474.
12.
ThielkeSSerranoJLepeX.A method for true coordinate three-dimensional measurement of casts using a measuring microscope. J Prosthet Dent1998; 80: 506–510.
MulcahyCSherriffMWalterJ. Measurement of misfit at the implant-prosthesis interface: an experimental method using a coordinate measuring machine. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants2000; 15: 111–118.
15.
MarkarianRUedaCSendykC. Stress distribution after installation of fixed frameworks with marginal gaps over angled and parallel implants: a photoelastic analysis. J Prosthodont2007; 16: 117–122.
16.
StaffordGDGlantzPO.Intraoral strain gauge measurements on complete dentures: a methodological study. J Dent1991; 19: 80–84.
17.
ClellandNGilatAMcGlumphyE. A photoelastic and strain gauge analysis of angled abutments for an implant system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants1993; 8: 541–548.
18.
KarlMWinterWTaylorT. Fixation of 5-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures and resulting bone loading: a finite element assessment based on in vitro strain measurements. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants2006; 21: 756–762.
19.
GengJTanKLiuG.Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent2001; 85: 585–598.
20.
AkçaKÇehreliMCIplikciogluH.A comparison of three-dimensional finite element stress analysis with in vitro strain gauge measurements on dental implants. Int J Prosthodont2002; 15(2): 115–121.
21.
HarderSKernM. Survival and complications of computer aided-designing and computer-aided manufacturing vs. conventionally fabricated implant-supported reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res2009; 20(Suppl. 4): 48–54.
22.
KaposTAshyLMGallucciGO. Computer-aided design and computer-assisted manufacturing in prosthetic implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants2009; 24(Suppl.): 110–117.
23.
OrtorpAJemtTBackT. Comparisons of precision of fit between cast and CNC-milled titanium implant frameworks for the edentulous mandible. Int J Prosthodont2003; 16: 194–200.
24.
Al-FaddaSAZarbGAFinerY.A comparison of the accuracy of fit of 2 methods for fabricating implant-prosthodontic frameworks. Int J Prosthodont2007; 20: 125–131.
25.
MondaniPLMondaniPM.The Pierluigi Mondani intraoral electric solder: principles of development and explanation of the solder using syncrystallization. Riv Odontostomatol Implantoprotesi1982; 4: 28–32.
26.
DegidiMGehrkePSpanelA. Syncrystallization: a technique for temporization of immediately loaded implants with metal-reinforced acrylic resin restorations. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res2006; 8: 123–134.
27.
DegidiMNardiDPiattelliA.Immediate rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible with a definitive prosthesis supported by an intraorally welded titanium bar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants2009; 24: 342–347.
28.
DegidiMNardiDPiattelliA.Prospective study with a 2-year follow-up on immediate implant loading in the edentulous mandible with a definitive restoration using intra-oral welding. Clin Oral Implants Res2010; 21: 379–385.
29.
DegidiMNardiDPiattelliA.Immediate loading of the edentulous maxilla with a final restoration supported by an intraoral welded titanium bar: a case series of 20 consecutive cases. J Periodontol2008; 79: 2207–2213.
30.
DegidiMNardiDPiattelliA.A comparison between immediate loading and immediate restoration in cases of partial posterior mandibular edentulism: a 3-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res2010; 21: 682–687.
OdinGSavoldelliCBouchardPO. Determination of Young’s modulus of mandibular bone using inverse analysis. Med Eng Phys2010; 32: 630–637.
33.
AkçaKÇehreliMC.Impression techniques and misfit-induced strains on implant-supported superstructures: an in vitro study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent2006; 26(4): 379–385.
34.
HegdeRLemonsJEBroomeJC. Validation of strain gauges as a method of measuring precision of fit of implant bars. Implant Dent2009; 18(2): 151–161.
35.
HelldenLDerandT.Description and evaluation of a simplified method to achieve passive fit between cast titanium frameworks and implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants1998; 13: 190–196.
36.
HollwegHJacquesLMouraM.Deformation of implant abutments after framework connection: a study with strain gauges. J Oral Implantol2012; 38: 125–132.
37.
MendesSEdwards RezendeCEMoretti NetoRT. Effect of framework soldering on the deformation of implant abutments after framework seating. Implant Dent2013; 22: 193–198.
38.
AbduoJBennaniVLyonsK. A novel in vitro approach to assess the fit of implant frameworks. Clin Oral Implants Res2011; 22: 658–663.
39.
ShigleyJEMischkeCR.Mechanical engineering design. 5th ed.Singapore: McGraw-Hill International Editions, 1989, pp.65–70.
40.
WangYQWuJKLiuHB. Modeling and numerical analysis of multi-bolt elastic interaction with bolt stress relaxation. Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science. Epub ahead of print 5November2015. DOI: 10.1177/0954406215615155.
41.
AbasoloMAguirrebeitiaJAvilésR. A tetraparametric metamodel for the analysis and design of bolting sequences for wind generator flanges. J Press Vessel Technol2011; 133: 041202-1–041202-15.
42.
AbasoloMAguirrebeitiaJAvilésR. Methodology for the optimization of bolting sequences for wind generator flanges. J Press Vessel Technol2014; 136: 061202-1–061202-13.
43.
AbidMHussainS.Relaxation behaviour of gasketed joints during assembly using finite element analysis. Sādhanā2010; 35: 31–43.
44.
BergerPDMaurerRE.Experimental design with applications in management, engineering and the sciences. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press, 2002.
45.
MontgomeryDC.Design and analysis of experiments. New York: Wiley, 2001.
46.
OlmiGFreddiACroccoloD.In-field measurement of forces and deformations at the rear end of a motorcycle and structural optimisation: experimental-numerical approach aimed at structural optimization. Strain2008; 44: 453–461.
47.
OlmiG.Investigation on the influence of temperature variation on the response of miniaturised piezoresistive sensors. Strain2009; 45: 63–76.
48.
CroccoloDDe AgostinisMMauriP. Influence of the engagement ratio on the joint strength of press fitted and adhesively bonded specimens. Int J Adhes Adhes2014; 53: 80–88.
49.
DegidiMNardiDSighinolfiG. In vitro infrared thermography assessment of temperature peaks during the intra-oral welding of titanium abutments. Infrared Phys Tech2012; 55: 279–283.
