The Precision of Fit of Milled Titanium Implant Frameworks (I‐Bridge®) in the Edentulous Jaw
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New computer numeric controlled (CNC)-milled frameworks for implant-supported prostheses have been introduced. However, no data are available on the precision of fit of these new frameworks. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of fit of a new CNC-milled framework technique (I-Bridge, Biomain AB, Helsingborg, Sweden) using Brånemark System (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) and NobelReplace (Nobel Biocare AB) system implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten test frameworks were fabricated for one master model for each implant system. Five additional frameworks were fabricated for five different models simulating clinical cases as controls (Brånemark System). The distortion of implant center point positions was measured in x-, y-, and z-axes and in three dimensions by using a contact-type coordinate measuring machine and a computer program developed specifically for this purpose. Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare differences of distortion within and between the groups. RESULTS: The maximal distortion in arch width (x-axis) and curvature (y-axis) was within 71 and 55 microm for all frameworks, respectively. The mean distortion in absolute figures in x-, y-, z-axes and three dimensions was for "clinical control" frameworks 23, 26, 4, and 34 microm as compared with less than 12, 12, 2, and 17 microm for Brånemark and NobelReplace frameworks, respectively. Control frameworks showed significantly (p < .05) greater mean and range of distortions in x- and y-axes and in three dimensions compared with test frameworks. CONCLUSION: All measured frameworks presented signs of misfit, indicating that no framework had a "passive fit." Frameworks produced in a more routine clinical environment seem to present greater levels of distortion as compared with frameworks produced in a strict test situation. However, all measured frameworks presented levels of precision of fit within limits considered to be clinically acceptable in earlier studies of frameworks placed on abutments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".