Comparative analysis of stability and removal torque of custom CAD-CAM versus stock abutments before and after cyclic loading: A systematic review with meta-analysis and GRADE analysis
Originally at sciencedirect.com
Summary & scoring by The Bell Brief (Dr. Jennifer Bell) using the Drill-Down Protocol (Drill-Down Score) — not the original publisher.
Why it matters for dental
Prosthodontic and implant practices must decide whether to continue using stock titanium abutments or switch to custom CAD-CAM abutments; this meta-analysis with GRADE rating quantifies the difference in long-term stability and removal torque, directly informing both clinical protocol and lab purchasing decisions for implant-supported restorations.
Key points
- Systematic review and meta-analysis aggregates data from multiple in-vitro studies on stock vs custom CAD-CAM abutments under cyclic loading simulating 5-year function.
- GRADE assessment provides a formal strength-of-evidence rating, allowing clinicians to weigh the reliability of stability and torque-loss findings before changing restorative workflows.
- Results apply to implantologists, prosthodontists, and labs choosing between pre-milled stock versus milled custom abutments for single- and multi-unit implant prostheses.
- Published online 2 September 2026 in The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry; dental schools and DSO implant programs can update CE curricula and procurement guidelines once the full paper is released.
Who should care
Read the original on Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry (JPD)
Full reporting and any paywall content live on sciencedirect.com. We summarize and score; we do not republish.
Related
- ·Research
An unusual exophytic palatal lesion with rapid growth: A case-based diagnostic approach
- ·Research
Retrospective analysis of CAD-CAM occlusal devices
- ·Clinical
Modified additive manufacturing and injection molding for diastema closure with an integrated occlusal prop
- ·Business
US Oral Surgery Management exec on M&A: ‘We’ve had to be even more disciplined’