{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024070021881838075, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011670313639679067, 'mean_word_length': 5.351851851851852, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prosthetic laboratory influence on the vertical misfit at the implant/UCLA abutment interface.

An inadequate fit at the abutment/implant interface can generate mechanical and biological problems. The laboratorial stages could induce misfit in such interface when the castable UCLA abutment type is used. The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate the performance of three prosthetic laboratories (Labs A, B and C) by vertical fit analysis of castable UCLA abutments on the casting and soldering stages of the same prosthesis. Four fixed prostheses were built by each laboratory using castable UCLA abutments. The evaluation was made by scanning electron microscopy under 500x magnification in the mesial and distal regions of each element of the prosthesis, totalizing 24 measurements per laboratory. The results were analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test (p<0.05). In the casting process, the values presented by the laboratories differed significantly to each other (p=0.004). After soldering, the values presented by the laboratories showed no significant difference (p=0.948). It may be concluded that the fit values obtained in the casting stage of UCLA abutments can be influenced when processed by different laboratories, and that conventional soldering itself increased the degree of framework misfit, regardless of which laboratory made it.