ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2026
Internal fit of cobalt-chromium and zirconia implant abutments fabricated using different techniques: a micro-computed tomography study.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the internal fit at the implant-abutment interface of zirconia and cobalt-chromium abutments fabricated using different techniques by micro-computed tomography (micro-CT).
methodsTwenty screw-retained abutments were divided into 4 groups (n = 5): milled zirconia (ZrCAD), milled cobalt-chromium (Co-CrMill), laser-sintered cobalt-chromium (Co-CrLS), and cast cobalt-chromium (Co-CrCL). Specimens were subjected to cyclic loading (300,000 cycles, 200 N) and thermocycling (10000 cycles, 5 to 50 °C). Internal fit was assessed by micro-CT at 3 regions and 3 spatial planes (180 measurements). Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Bonferroni-Holm tests (α = 0.05).
resultsSignificant differences in internal fit were found (p < 0.05). Co-CrLS showed the highest internal gap values (26.75 ± 7.05 μm, 87.00 ± 3.26 μm, 86.50 ± 5.76 μm). Significant differences were observed between Co-CrLS and ZrCAD (Region 1, p = 0.003), Co-CrMill (Regions 1 and 2, p = 0.003-0.004), and Co-CrCL (Regions 1 and 3, p = 0.003-0.001). Total values also differed between Co-CrMill and Co-CrLS (p = 0.012) and Co-CrCL and Co-CrLS (p = 0.002).
conclusionsInternal fit differed among the evaluated workflows. Laser-sintered cobalt-chromium abutments showed the least favorable adaptation, whereas milled and cast cobalt-chromium showed lower gap values; zirconia showed intermediate descriptive values. The clinical significance of these differences remains uncertain. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.