English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The present study evaluated the interchangeability of prosthetic components for external hexagon implants by measuring the precision of the implant/abutment (I/A) interface with scanning electron microscopy. Ten implants for each of three brands (SIN, Conexão, Neodent) were tested with their respective abutments (milled CoCr collar rotational and non-rotational) and another of an alternative manufacturer (Microplant) in randomly arranged I/A combinations. The degree of interchangeability between the various brands of components was defined using the original abutment interface gap with its respective implant as the benchmark dimension. Accordingly, when the result for a given component placed on an implant was equal to or smaller then that gap measured when the original component of the same brand as the implant was positioned, interchangeability was considered valid. Data were compared with the Kruskal-Wallis test at 5% significance level. Some degree of misfit was observed in all specimens. Generally, the non-rotational component was more accurate than its rotational counterpart. The latter samples ranged from 0.6-16.9 µm, with a 4.6 µm median; and the former from 0.3-12.9 µm, with a 3.4 µm median. Specimens with the abutment and fixture from Conexão had larger microgap than the original set for SIN and Neodent (p&lt;0.05). Even though the latter systems had similar results with their respective components, their interchanged abutments did not reproduce the original accuracy. The results suggest that the alternative brand abutment would have compatibility with all systems while the other brands were not completely interchangeable.

Connecting accuracy of interchanged prosthetic abutments to different dental implants using scanning electron microscopy