ArticleBMC oral health2026
Passive fit and trueness of complete-arch implant-supported cobalt chromium frameworks manufactured using different digital techniques: a laboratory study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPassive fit and trueness are keys to the success of complete-arch implant-supported cobalt chromium frameworks, so this study aimed to assess and compare the passive fit and trueness of cobalt chromium (Co-Cr) complete-arch implant-supported frameworks fabricated using milling and three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies with those produced using the conventional lost wax technique.
methodsA maxillary typodont with 5 implant digital analogs was scanned using a desktop scanner, a complete-arch implant-supported framework was designed, and the design's standard tessellation language (STL) file was designated as the reference file. A total of 24 frameworks were fabricated. In the first group, the frameworks were initially milled from wax blanks and subsequently processed using the conventional lost wax technique. In the second group, frameworks were milled from Co-Cr blanks, while in the third group, frameworks were 3D printed utilizing the selective laser melting technique from Co-Cr powder. Frameworks were scanned, and corresponding STL files were imported into a surface-matching software program to assess trueness. Passive fit was evaluated using a one-screw test and a handheld digital microscope. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way and two-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05) for pairwise comparison.
resultsSignificant differences were found among fabrication techniques for both passive fit and trueness. The milled group demonstrated the lowest mean of vertical gap during passive fit assessment, while the conventional lost wax group exhibited the highest mean. Correspondingly, trueness values were lowest for the milled frameworks, intermediate for 3D-printed frameworks, and highest for conventional lost-wax.
conclusionsDigital fabrication techniques, particularly CAD-CAM milling, provided superior fit and trueness compared to conventional casting of Co-Cr complete-arch implant frameworks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.