Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Immediate implant restoration by prefabricated prosthesis has multiple benefits. However, the design and insertion workflow of the prosthesis may influence the seating.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of seating accuracy of prefabricated interim prosthesis of different designs and insertion workflows for immediate restoration of implants placed via static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS).
METHODS: A maxillary model without incisors was used to plan for two implants at the lateral incisor locations. According to the planned implants, sCAIS surgical template and a four-unit interim prosthesis were designed. Four prostheses were fabricated based on the design and insertion workflow. The first prosthesis involved complete fabrication (CF) of the interim prosthesis, where the interim prosthesis is fabricated for laboratory attachment to abutments. The other three prostheses were produced by partial fabrication (PF), where the interim prosthesis shell was produced with internal spacing between the fitting surface and the abutments. The PF prostheses were cemented on abutments attached to the inserted implants. Three different PF prosthesis designs were included with different levels of internal spacing: 100 μm (PF.1), 200 μm (PF.2), and 300 μm (PF.3). A total of 15 surgical models received implants on which each prosthesis was seated and scanned by a laboratory scanner. The vertical, horizontal, and proximal contact errors were measured.
RESULTS: Although all prostheses were seated on every model, the CF prostheses had greater vertical error, followed by PF.1, PF.2, and PF.3 prostheses, respectively. A similar pattern was observed for proximal contact error, where PF.3 was most superior. PF.3 prostheses had the least horizontal error than the other prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS: All interim prostheses experienced errors at the vertical, horizontal, and proximal surfaces, which can be attributed to deviations of the inserted implants. The PF of interim prosthesis with increased internal spacing for intraoral insertion appeared to reduce seating errors.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of seating accuracy of prefabricated interim prosthesis of different designs and insertion workflows for immediate restoration of implants placed via static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS).
METHODS: A maxillary model without incisors was used to plan for two implants at the lateral incisor locations. According to the planned implants, sCAIS surgical template and a four-unit interim prosthesis were designed. Four prostheses were fabricated based on the design and insertion workflow. The first prosthesis involved complete fabrication (CF) of the interim prosthesis, where the interim prosthesis is fabricated for laboratory attachment to abutments. The other three prostheses were produced by partial fabrication (PF), where the interim prosthesis shell was produced with internal spacing between the fitting surface and the abutments. The PF prostheses were cemented on abutments attached to the inserted implants. Three different PF prosthesis designs were included with different levels of internal spacing: 100 μm (PF.1), 200 μm (PF.2), and 300 μm (PF.3). A total of 15 surgical models received implants on which each prosthesis was seated and scanned by a laboratory scanner. The vertical, horizontal, and proximal contact errors were measured.
RESULTS: Although all prostheses were seated on every model, the CF prostheses had greater vertical error, followed by PF.1, PF.2, and PF.3 prostheses, respectively. A similar pattern was observed for proximal contact error, where PF.3 was most superior. PF.3 prostheses had the least horizontal error than the other prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS: All interim prostheses experienced errors at the vertical, horizontal, and proximal surfaces, which can be attributed to deviations of the inserted implants. The PF of interim prosthesis with increased internal spacing for intraoral insertion appeared to reduce seating errors.
摘要：
背景：通过预制假体立即修复植入物具有多种益处。然而,假体的设计和插入工作流程可能会影响座椅。
目的：评估不同设计的预制临时假体的入座精度和插入工作流程，以立即恢复通过静态计算机辅助植入手术（sCAIS）放置的植入物。
方法：使用没有切牙的上颌模型来计划在侧切牙位置的两个植入物。根据计划中的植入,设计了sCAIS手术模板和四单元临时假体。根据设计和插入工作流程制造了四个假体。第一个假体涉及临时假体的完整制造（CF），其中临时假体是为实验室连接到基台而制造的。其他三个假体是通过部分制造（PF）生产的，其中临时假体外壳在装配表面和基台之间具有内部间距。PF假体固定在连接到插入植入物的基台上。包括三种不同的PF假体设计，内部间距不同：100μm（PF.1），200μm(PF.2),和300μm(PF.3)。总共有15个手术模型接受了植入物，每个假体都固定在植入物上，并用实验室扫描仪进行扫描。垂直的,水平,并测量了近端接触误差。
结果：尽管所有假肢都坐在每个模型上，CF假体有更大的垂直误差，其次是PF.1、PF.2和PF.3假体，分别。对于近端接触误差观察到类似的模式，PF.3是最优越的。PF.3假体的水平误差比其他假体最小。
结论：所有临时假体在垂直方向出现错误，水平,和近端表面，这可以归因于插入的植入物的偏差。用于口内插入的内部间距增加的临时假体的PF似乎减少了座椅误差。
目的：评估不同设计的预制临时假体的入座精度和插入工作流程，以立即恢复通过静态计算机辅助植入手术（sCAIS）放置的植入物。
方法：使用没有切牙的上颌模型来计划在侧切牙位置的两个植入物。根据计划中的植入,设计了sCAIS手术模板和四单元临时假体。根据设计和插入工作流程制造了四个假体。第一个假体涉及临时假体的完整制造（CF），其中临时假体是为实验室连接到基台而制造的。其他三个假体是通过部分制造（PF）生产的，其中临时假体外壳在装配表面和基台之间具有内部间距。PF假体固定在连接到插入植入物的基台上。包括三种不同的PF假体设计，内部间距不同：100μm（PF.1），200μm(PF.2),和300μm(PF.3)。总共有15个手术模型接受了植入物，每个假体都固定在植入物上，并用实验室扫描仪进行扫描。垂直的,水平,并测量了近端接触误差。
结果：尽管所有假肢都坐在每个模型上，CF假体有更大的垂直误差，其次是PF.1、PF.2和PF.3假体，分别。对于近端接触误差观察到类似的模式，PF.3是最优越的。PF.3假体的水平误差比其他假体最小。
结论：所有临时假体在垂直方向出现错误，水平,和近端表面，这可以归因于插入的植入物的偏差。用于口内插入的内部间距增加的临时假体的PF似乎减少了座椅误差。
