Comparison of Prosthetic Complications and Framework Misfit Among Different Cobalt-Chromium Framework Fabrication Techniques

NCT07489027 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: A05012023RP
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 27
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

This randomized clinical study aimed to compare prosthetic complications and framework misfit associated with three different fabrication techniques of cobalt-chromium frameworks-conventional casting, CAD/CAM milling, and selective laser melting (SLM)-used in maxillary and mandibular full-arch implant-supported acrylic screw-retained restorations.

Conditions

Prosthesis (Internal) Complications

Keywords

Full arch prosthesis; Co-Cr framework; CAD/CAM milling; Selective laser melting

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• the number of occurance of Prosthetic complications

  The prosthetic complications were evaluated for the three different types of Co-Cr frameworks The following prosthetic complications were evaluated: * abutment screw loosening * abutment screw fracture * prosthetic screw loosening * prosthetic screw fracture * acrylic teeth fracture (separation) * acrylic teeth wear (replacement) * co-cr framework fracture

  after a year

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• the implant framework Passive fit

  baseline

Study Arms (3)

Group I: Conventional cast Co-Cr framework

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

patients received maxillary and mandibular full-arch implant fixed prosthesis with conventional casting CO-CR framework

Device: Implant supported prosthesis

Group II: CAD/CAM milled Co-Cr framework

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

patients received maxillary and mandibular full-arch implant fixed prosthesis with milled CO-CR framework

Device: Implant supported prosthesis

Group III: Selective laser melting (SLM) Co-Cr framework

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

patients received maxillary and mandibular full-arch implant fixed prosthesis with a laser-melted CO-CR framework.

Device: Implant supported prosthesis

Interventions

Implant supported prosthesis DEVICE

All patients received maxillary and mandibular six implants to support a metal acrylic screw retained full-arch prosthesis

Group I: Conventional cast Co-Cr framework; Group II: CAD/CAM milled Co-Cr framework; Group III: Selective laser melting (SLM) Co-Cr framework

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 45 Years - 70 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Six osseointegrated maxillary and six mandibular implants
• No clinical or radiographic signs of implant failure
• Good systemic health
• Normal maxillomandibular relationship and acceptable oral hygiene

You may not qualify if:

• Implant failure
• Unfavorable occlusal relationships
• Poor compliance or inability to attend follow-up

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Mansoura University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Mansoura University , Faculty Of Dentistry

Al Mansurah, Dakahlia Governorate, P.O.Box:35516, Egypt

Location

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Dental Prosthesis; Prosthodontics; Dentistry; Prostheses and Implants; Equipment and Supplies

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Model Details: Patients were randomly allocated to three equal groups (n = 9) by simple randomization:Group I: Conventional cast Co-Cr framework, Group II: CAD/CAM milled Co-Cr framework, and Group III: SLM Co-Cr framework

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: February 23, 2026
• First Posted: March 23, 2026
• Study Start: January 18, 2024
• Primary Completion: November 6, 2024
• Study Completion: February 15, 2026
• Last Updated: March 23, 2026

Record last verified: 2023-12

Locations

EG (1)