Photoelastic comparison of as-cast and laser-welded implant frameworks

Analysis of implant-supported cantilever fixed partial denture: An in vitro comparative study on vertical misfit, stress distribution, and cantilever fracture strength

PURPOSE

To evaluate the vertical misfit, stress distribution around dental implants, and cantilever fracture strength of 3-unit implant-supported cantilever fixed partial dentures (FPDs) using frameworks made from different materials and manufacturing techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty FPDs were fabricated and divided into 5 groups (n = 8) based on the framework material used: LAS Co-Cr (Conventional casting-laser welding); TIG Co-Cr (Conventional casting -TIG welding); OP Co-Cr (Conventional casting-one-piece); CAD Co-Cr (CAD-CAM); and CAD Zr (CAD-CAM ZrO2). The vertical misfit was evaluated before porcelain application (T1) and before (T2), and after thermomechanical cycling (T3) by stereomicroscopy. Cantilever fracture strength was tested with a 50 kN (5000 kgf) load cell at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Qualitative and quantitative photoelastic analysis was performed to evaluate stress distribution at seven specific points in five FPDs (n = 1/group) subjected to occlusal loading.

RESULTS

Only the molar showed interaction among the three factors (G × S × T; F(20.932) = 1.630; p = 0.044). Thermomechanical cycling (T2 vs. T3) had a significant effect on intra-group vertical misfit in molar, especially in LAS Co-Cr (Δ = 5.87; p = 0.018) and OP Co-Cr (Δ = 5.39; p = 0.007), with no significant effect in premolar (p > 0.05). Ceramic application combined with thermomechanical cycling (T1 vs. T3) caused a significant intra-group increase in vertical misfit in all groups, both in the molar and premolar (p < 0.05). OP Co-Cr was associated with greater vertical misfit and stress concentration. Frameworks manufactured by the CAD-CAM system exhibited lower vertical misfit and better stress distribution. FPDs with metal frameworks (>410.83 ± 72.26 N) showed significantly higher fracture strength (p < 0.05) than zirconia (277.47 ± 39.10 N), and the first signs of ceramic veneering fracture were observed around 900 N.

CONCLUSIONS

FPDs with frameworks manufactured using a CAD-CAM system appear to be associated with lower vertical misfit and better stress distribution, although the section of the frameworks followed by welding may be a viable alternative. In addition, metal frameworks exhibit high fracture strength.

Photoelasticity for Stress Concentration Analysis in Dentistry and Medicine

Complex stresses are created or applied as part of medical and dental treatments, which are linked to the achievement of treatment goals and favorable prognosis. Photoelasticity is an optical technique that can help observe and understand biomechanics, which is essential for planning, evaluation and treatment in health professions. The objective of this project was to review the existing information on the use of photoelasticity in medicine and dentistry and determine their purpose, the areas or treatments for which it was used, models used as well as to identify areas of opportunity for the application of the technique and the generation of new models. A literature review was carried out to identify publications in dentistry and medicine in which photoelasticity was used as an experimental method. The databases used were: Sciencedirect, PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Springer, EBSCO, Wiley, Lilacs, Medigraphic Artemisa and SciELO. Duplicate and incomplete articles were eliminated, obtaining 84 articles published between 2000 and 2019 for analysis. In dentistry, ten subdisciplines were found in which photoelasticity was used; those related to implants for fixed prostheses were the most abundant. In medicine, orthopedic research predominates; and its application is not limited to hard tissues. No reports were found on the use of photoelastic models as a teaching aid in either medicine or dentistry. Photoelasticity has been widely used in the context of research where it has limitations due to the characteristics of the results provided by the technique, there is no evidence of use in the health area to exploit its application in learning biomechanics; on the other hand there is little development in models that faithfully represent the anatomy and characteristics of the different tissues of the human body, which opens the opportunity to take up the qualitative results offered by the technique to transpolate it to an application and clinical learning.

Evaluation and comparison of vertical marginal fit of three different types of multiunit screw-retained framework fabricated for an implant-supported prosthesis - An in vitro study

Aim

The present study aimed to evaluate on a comparative basis the vertical marginal fit between conventionally casted, direct metal laser sintered (DMLS), and milled computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) one-piece metal framework supported by five implants using one-screw test and screw resistance test.

Settings and Design

This is an in vitro study.

Materials and Methods

Five implants were placed parallel to one other in a Styrofoam master model. A total of 30 implant-supported screw-retained superstructures were manufactured using three techniques, i.e., conventionally casted, milled, and sintered. To evaluate the vertical marginal discrepancy, screw resistance test, and one-screw test were used, and measurements were made using a stereomicroscope.

Statistical Analysis Used

The data was analysed using two statistical tests, i.e., ANOVA and the post hoc Bonferroni test.

Results

On evaluating the frameworks using one-screw test, the mean vertical misfit value at the terminal implant for the control group was 292.58 ± 15.46μm, for conventionally casted framework 398.41 ± 21.13 μm, for DMLS 343.44 ± 24.73 μm, and for CAD-CAM was 304.03 ± 14.23 μm, whereas the average misfit values at four implants on applying screw resistance test were 1268.65 ± 84.24 (control), 1774.88 ± 67.70 (casted), 1508.02 ± 62.19 (DMLS), and 1367.29 ± 81.87 (CAD-CAM). The average misfit values on two implants using screw resistance test were 635.02 ± 57.33 for the control group; for conventionally casted, it was 879.75 ± 35.93; for (DMLS) framework, it was 761.51 ± 32.85; and for milled CAD-CAM framework, it was 687.07 ± 42.17 μm.

Conclusion

The mean vertical marginal discrepancy, when compared with control, was least in milled CAD-CAM frameworks, followed by sintered DMLS and conventionally casted frameworks. Hence, according to the present study, CAD/CAM technique is recommended to achieve maximum marginal fit in full mouth screw-retained implant-supported FDPs.

Evaluation of misfit and stress distribution in implant-retained prosthesis obtained by different methods

This study evaluated the vertical misfit, passivity, and stress distribution after tightening the screws of different prosthesis. Two implants were used to simulate the rehabilitation of partially edentulous mandible space from the second premolar to the second molar. 40 three-element screw-retained fixed dental prosthesis with distal cantilever were fabricated and divided into four groups according to the method of production of framework (n = 10): G1 = conventional casting one-piece framework, G2 = conventional casting sectioned and laser welding, G3 = conventional casting sectioned and tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding and G4 = framework obtained by CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) system. The vertical misfits (both screws tightened) and the passive fit (one screw tightened) were measured under a comparator optical microscope. The data was submitted to Shapiro-Wilk test to enable comparison with ANOVA followed by Tukey with Bonferroni adjust (α = .05). The qualitative analysis of the stress distribution was performed by the photoelastic method. The vertical misfit (both screws tightened) of the G2 (24 μm) and G3 (27 μm) were significantly higher than G4 (10 μm) (p = 0,006). The passive fit (for the non-tightened) of the G1(64 μm) and G3 (61 μm) were significantly higher than the G4 (32 μm) (p=0,009). G1 showed high stress between the implants in the photoelastic analysis and G4 presented lower stress. In conclusion, CAD/CAM method results in less vertical misfit, more passivity, and consequently better stress distribution to the bone.

Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation of a Patient with Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Case Report

Patients who have undergone maxillary resection procedures are rehabilitated with dental obturators or microvascular reconstruction. This case report describes implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation of a patient who underwent maxillary resection due to squamous cell carcinoma. After maxillectomy surgery, the patient was rehabilitated using a surgical obturator for one week followed by an interim obturator until the surgical field was completely healed. For definitive prosthesis, different treatment options were presented from which the patient selected an implant-supported maxillofacial prosthesis and a removable mandibular partial prosthesis. Under general anesthesia, two zygomatic implants and four conventional implants to the posterior maxilla were inserted. After a healing period, the bar-retained maxillofacial prosthesis and removable mandibular partial denture were fabricated. The patient was satisfied with regard to function, esthetics, speech, and swallowing. No problems, except slight discoloration of the prosthesis were noted at the 6-month follow-up. Implant-supported maxillofacial prostheses are a valuable treatment option to improve   quality of life after maxillary resection.

Implant framework misfit: A systematic review on assessment methods and clinical complications

BACKGROUND

The fit of implant-supported prostheses is of prime importance for the long-term success of implant therapy.

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to evaluate recent evidence on current techniques for assessing implant-framework misfit, its associated strain/stress, and whether these misfits are related to mechanical, biological, and clinical consequences.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search for publications from January 2010 to October 2020 was performed using the Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases with combined keywords on implant-framework misfit assessments and related clinical complications. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. After full-text analyses, data extraction was implemented on current techniques of misfit assessment and the relationship between the misfit and the induced strain/stress.

RESULTS

A total of 3 in vivo and 92 in vitro studies were selected, including 47 studies on quantifying the degree of implant-framework misfit with dimensional techniques, 24 studies measuring misfit-induced strain/stress with modeling techniques, and 24 studies using both methods. The technical details, advantages, and limitations of each technique were illustrated. The correlation between the implant-framework misfit and the induced strain/stress has been revealed in vitro, while that with the biological complications and implant/prostheses failure was weak in clinical studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Dimensional and modeling techniques are available to measure the implant-framework misfit. The passivity of implant-supported fixed prostheses appeared related to the induced strain/stress, but not the clinical complications. Further studies combining three-dimensional (3D) assessments using dimensional and modeling techniques was needed.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of welding procedures in one-piece cast implant-supported frameworks

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of welding techniques on implant-supported prostheses and determine whether they contribute to a better adaptation compared with a one-piece cast. A search was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, and articles published until November 2017 were obtained from these databases. This review followed the PRISMA criteria and is registered on the PROSPERO platform (CRD42017081865). The PICO question was "Do welding procedures in one-piece cast implant-supported frameworks influence implant/abutment-framework marginal misfits?" Eleven studies were selected for a qualitative analysis, and seven studies were selected for a quantitative analysis. A total of 189 specimens were fabricated using different materials (cp-Ti, Ni-Cr, Cr-Co, and noble alloys), and welding techniques such as laser welding, conventional welding, tungsten inert gas, and brazing were applied. A vertical marginal misfit was measured using an optical microscope, a stereomicroscope, and/or a scanning electron microscopy. The qualitative analysis in the studies demonstrated a positive effect of the welding techniques on the adaptation of the infrastructures. The meta-analysis confirmed the results (p < 0.00001; MD: -36.14; 95%CI: -48.69 to -23.59). Within the limitations of this study and regarding the heterogeneity of the samples, we conclude that the soldering point technique is effective for obtaining relatively low values of marginal misfit, with laser welding as the most effective technique. However, additional studies were recommended due to the heterogeneity of different variables (alloys, connection, and misfit evaluation) in the included studies.

Evaluation of Marginal Misfit of Metal Frameworks Welded by Gas-Torch, Laser, and Tungsten Inert Gas Methods

Purpose

The objective of this study was to evaluate the marginal fit and the flexural resistance of nickel-chromium frameworks welded by different techniques, gas-torch, laser, and tungsten inert gas (TIG), compared with that of frameworks made via one-piece casting.

Methods

To evaluate the marginal fit, a master model was fabricated simulating four implants. Transfers and replicas were used to transfer the positions of the implants to the model, using a silicone matrix. The bars were waxed up and casted. Three assessments of misfit were performed for each implant using a stereomicroscope before and after welding in two predetermined regions, totaling six readings for each implant. To evaluate the flexural resistance, one group was made casting the specimens in one piece. Other 3 groups using gas-torch, laser, and TIG welding techniques were made after sectioned transversally. The data showed normal distribution and two-way ANOVA for marginal fit and one-way ANOVA for flexural resistance, and Tukey's posttest (α=0.05) was performed.

Results

For the marginal fit, the three welding methods presented similar results and were different from one-piece casting. For the flexural resistance, significant differences were observed among the studied groups (p < 0.001), and the one-piece group presented higher resistance compared to the three welding techniques.

Conclusions

Within the limits of this study, the three welding techniques yielded similar misfit results, and the laser and TIG techniques presented similar flexural resistance but lower than gas-torch and one-piece casting.

Photoelastic analysis of mandibular full-arch implant-supported fixed dentures made with different bar materials and manufacturing techniques

PURPOSE

To compare the stress distribution of mandibular full dentures supported with implants according to the bar materials and manufacturing techniques using a qualitative photoelastic analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An acrylic master model simulating the mandibular arch was fabricated with four Morse taper implant analogs of 4.5×6mm. Four different bars were manufactured according to different material and techniques: fiber-reinforced resin (G1, Trinia, CAD/CAM), commercially pure titanium (G2, cpTi, CAD/CAM), cobalt‑chromium (G3, Co-Cr, CAD/CAM) and cobalt‑chromium (G4, Co-Cr, conventional cast). Standard clinical and laboratory procedures were used by an experienced dental technician to fabricate 4 mandibular implant-supported dentures. The photoelastic model was created based on the acrylic master model. A load simulation (150N) was performed in total occlusion against the antagonist.

RESULTS

Dentures with fiber-reinforced resin bar (G1) exhibited better stress distribution. Dentures with machined Co-Cr bar (G3) exhibited the worst standard of stress distribution, with an overload on the distal part of the posteriors implants, followed by dentures with cast Co-Cr bar (G4) and machined cpTi bar (G2).

CONCLUSION

The fiber-reinforced resin bar exhibited an adequate stress distribution and can serve as a viable alternative for oral rehabilitation with mandibular full dentures supported with implants. Moreover, the use of the G1 group offered advantages including reduced weight and less possible overload to the implants components, leading to the preservation of the support structure.