Int J Prosthodont. 2019 Jul/Aug;32(4):361-363. doi: 10.11607/ijp.6157.
To compare marginal adaptation before and after cementation of implant-supported metal-free frameworks fabricated from zirconia, polyetheretherketone (PEEK), or composite.
Thirty-six CAD/CAM frameworks were constructed from zirconia, PEEK, or composite (n = 12 per material). Marginal gap was measured using a Video Measuring Machine (VMM) system, and repeated-measures analysis of variance was employed for data analysis (P < .05).
Absolute marginal discrepancies of all frameworks decreased significantly after cementation (P < .05). Zirconia and composite frameworks' marginal gap values were clinically acceptable, while PEEK frameworks were judged as being on the borderline of acceptability. Zirconia demonstrated significantly better marginal adaptation than PEEK (P < .05).
Zirconia showed the best marginal adaptation of the three tested metal-free frameworks.
比较氧化锆、聚醚醚酮(PEEK)或复合材料制作的种植体支持无金属框架在黏固前后的边缘适合性。
用 CAD/CAM 技术制作 36 个氧化锆、PEEK 或复合材料的框架(每种材料 12 个)。用视频测量机(VMM)系统测量边缘间隙,采用重复测量方差分析进行数据分析(P <.05)。
所有框架的绝对边缘差异在黏固后显著减小(P <.05)。氧化锆和复合材料框架的边缘间隙值可接受,而 PEEK 框架则处于可接受的边缘。氧化锆的边缘适合性明显优于 PEEK(P <.05)。
三种测试的无金属框架中,氧化锆的边缘适合性最好。