×
Inside Dentistry
December 2015
Volume 11, Issue 12

For definitive restoration fabrication, a scan body was placed and an intraoral scan performed. A virtual model was created and several definitive restoration scenarios pursued. A custom abutment and crown were designed (Figure 11) and abutment milled from a PreFAB-4 blank in the DS1300. A monolithic zirconia crown (NexxZr®T, Sagemax, www.sagemax-dental.com) was milled and differentially shaded to an A3.5 shade. A lithium disilicate (IPS e.max®, Ivoclar Vivadent, www.ivoclarvivadent.com) crown was also milled simultaneously with the custom titanium abutment in the DS1300 system (Figure 12).

On delivery, the custom abutment was seated and ceramic crowns tried in; proximal contacts and occlusion were checked. The crowns were polished with either the Dialite® ZR or Dialite® LD system (Brasseler USA, www.brasselerusa.com). The zirconia crown was selected and cemented with SpeedCEM (Ivoclar Vivadent) on the custom abutment in the laboratory. The retrievable abutment crown was seated on the implant, the abutment screw torqued to the appropriate level, and screw access hole filled with PTFE tape and composite resin (Figure 13 and Figure 14).

Summary

All of the components necessary for a completely digital workflow have finally come together. The transformative technology of a compact desktop wet milling machine combined with the semi-prefabricated titanium milling blank enable the dental clinic or dental lab* to perform same-day milling of an implant abutment, ceramic crown, or hybrid ceramic crown. Intraoral scanning devices, design software developments, and integration of all the components in the process bring dentistry to a new age in digital implant prosthodontics. Equally encouraging is that these technologies are highly affordable and give the practice or lab* the freedom and control to produce cost-effective custom abutments yet still deliver high precision without compromise.

Disclosure

The authors have no relevant financial interests to disclose.

Acknowledgement

Thanks to Dr. Michael Yeh of Federal Way, Washington, for his outstanding surgical implant placement.

*Disclaimer

Dentists may use this system to mill implant abutments for their own clinical use. Dental laboratories wishing to produce and market 510k-cleared custom implant abutments with this system can do so when following appropriate procedures. Contact Biodenta for additional details.

References

1. Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig. 2015;19(8):2027-2034.

2. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, et al. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(6):1687-1694.

3. Sorensen JA. Accuracy of full-arch scanning with intra-oral scanners [abstract 52]. Presented at: AADR 43rd Annual Meeting; March 10, 201; Charlotte, NC.

4. Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, Gallucci GO. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(6):715-719.

5. Schepke U, Meijer HJ, Kerdijk W, Cune MS. Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: Operating time and patient preference. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(3):403-406.

6. Rayyan MM, Aboushelib M, Sayed NM, et al. Comparison of interim restorations fabricated by CAD/CAM with those fabricated manually. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(3):414-419.

7. Linkevicius T, Vindasiute E, Puisys A, et al. The influence of the cementation margin position on the amount of undetected cement. A prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(1):71-76.

8. Jepsen S, Berglundh T, Genco R, et al. Primary prevention of peri-implantitis: managing peri-implant mucositis. J Clin Periodontol. 2015;42 Suppl 16:S152-S157.

9. Linkevicius T, Vindasiute E, Puisys, A, Peciuliene, V. The influence of margin location on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22 (12):1379-1384.

10. Agar JR, Cameron SM, Hughbanks, JC, Parker MH. Cement removal from restorations luted to titanium abutments with simulated subgingival margins. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;78(1):43-47.

11. Wilson TG Jr. The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study. J Periodontol. 2009;80(9):1388-1392.

12. Galindo-Moreno P, León-Cano A, Ortega-Oller I, et al. Prosthetic abutment height is a key factor in peri-implant marginal bone loss. J Dent Res. 2014;93 (7 Suppl):80S-85S.

13. Broggini N, McManus LM, Hermann JS, et al. Peri-implant inflammation defined by the implant-abutment interface. J Dent Res. 2006;85(5):473-478.

14. Taylor TD. Prosthodontic problems and limitations associated with osseointegration. J Prosthet Dent. 1998;79(1):74-78.

15. International Standards Organization (ISO5725-1:1994) Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 1: General principles and definitions. 1994:1-4.

16. An HS. Accuracy of milled custom abutments fabricated from a semi-prefabricated abutment blank. MSD Thesis, University of Washington. 2015.

© 2021 AEGIS Communications | Privacy Policy