Digital versus conventional techniques for pattern fabrication of implant-supported frameworks.

Abstract

Objective:The aim of this experimental study was to compare retention of frameworks cast from wax patterns fabricated by three different methods.Materials and Methods:Thirty-six implant analogs connected to one-piece abutments were divided randomly into three groups according to the wax pattern fabrication method (n = 12). Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) milling machine, three-dimensional printer, and conventional technique were used for fabrication of waxing patterns. All laboratory procedures were performed by an expert-reliable technician to eliminate intra-operator bias. The wax patterns were cast, finished, and seated on related abutment analogs. The number of adjustment times was recorded and analyzed by Kruskal–Wallis test. Frameworks were cemented on the corresponding analogs with zinc phosphate cement and tensile resistance test was used to measure retention value.Statistical Analysis Used:One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis. Level of significance was set at P < 0.05.Results:The mean retentive values of 680.36 ± 21.93 N, 440.48 ± 85.98 N, and 407.23 ± 67.48 N were recorded for CAD/CAM, rapid prototyping, and conventional group, respectively. One-way ANOVA test revealed significant differences among the three groups (P < 0.001). The post hoc Tukey test showed significantly higher retention for CAD/CAM group (P < 0.001), while there was no significant difference between the two other groups (P = 0.54). CAD/CAM group required significantly more adjustments (P < 0.001).Conclusions:CAD/CAM-fabricated wax patterns showed significantly higher retention for implant-supported cement-retained frameworks; this could be a valuable help when there are limitations in the retention of single-unit implant restorations.