Abstract
ObjectiveThe purpose of the invitro research was to compare the fit of Cobalt Chromium customized bar fabricated with different manufacturing processes cast metal bar, milled bar and 3D printed bar using scanning electron microscope.Materials and methodsClear epoxy resin molds were prepared. In each mold two parallel implants with a 14 mm distance from each other were embedded. Thirty Co-Cr custom bars were constructed and were divided equally into three groups: Group (I) (Co-Cr conv), group (II) milled bar (Co-Cr milled), and group (III) printed bar (Co-Cr print). The marginal fit at implant-abutment interface was scanned using scanning electron microscope (SEM).ResultsThere was a significant difference between the three studied groups regarding marginal misfit the between implant and fabricated bars with p-value < 0.001. The highest value of micro-gap distance was found in Co-Cr conventional group (7.95 ± 2.21 μm) followed by Co-Cr 3D printed group (4.98 ± 1.73) and the lower value were found in Co-Cr milled (3.22 ± 0.75).ConclusionThe marginal fit of milled, 3D printed and conventional cast for Co-Cr alloy were within the clinically acceptable range of misfit. CAD/CAM milled Co-Cr bar revealed a superior internal fit at the implant-abutment interface. This was followed by selective laser melting (SLM) 3D printed bar and the least fit was shown for customized bar with the conventional lost wax technique.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
