2-CONN.. some fun cases

Andrew Priddy

Andrew Priddy

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
199
this is for a group practice 2-CONNect... milled in acrylic and cast in CrCo
I would have much rather done this slm... so any input appreciated.

WP_20150623_004.jpg


WP_20150706_004.jpg


WP_20150706_001.jpg


this case was done by another Lab... the engagements were simply ground off.. not even polished, and still couldn't be seated by the Dr.

33 degree angle made it a tough case for even 2-CONNect.. I had to polish mid way in the abutment so get it to drop in. the zir was milled out by Axis

WP_20150609_002.jpg


WP_20150609_004.jpg
 
Last edited:
JohnWilson

JohnWilson

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
5,487
Reaction score
1,575
Looks like most two connect cases on narrow fixtures really problematic for emergence with that big lip. What we have gone to is to square up one abutment when the insertion divergence is over 20degrees . We place one eng cad base then design a custom abutment parallel to the cad base . We then make a screw retained bridge with one screw and sleeved over the custom abutment. Solves the poor surgical planning and maintains proper emergence from the fixture


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Andrew Priddy

Andrew Priddy

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
199
yea John, that makes sense.. can you post a pic next time you do one? I had to read your post a few times to wrap my mind around it.
 
JohnWilson

JohnWilson

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
5,487
Reaction score
1,575
Sure Andrew,

the transmucosal abutment is a good thing and simplifies poor planning for many cases, the problem is that a lot of the narrow fixtures really are not a great choice

Even with the use of Non eng parts with internal connection fixtures they have issues with draw. Like in the picture you posted of the bridge from the other lab, even though that case appears to have had eng parts rounded over the concept is the same

However, going straight to the fixture has a lot of merit, and is my first choice.

1) Simplifies delivery and verification of master model
2) Lower cost
3) Added benefit of the use of a abutment screw rather than a prosthetic screw for added torque value. ( while 2 connect has some fixtures with higher value it still does not correspond)

Utilizing other cad bases that solve some of these features and or using a lathe to "turn the engaging interface off can help solve some of these issues but is more implant related and angle dependent. Having more tools in the tool box is especially helpful but experience is what will guide you to LOOK/developed better options to integrate into your digital workflow.
 

Similar threads

prestige.dental
Replies
6
Views
800
prestige.dental
prestige.dental
S
Replies
22
Views
5K
CoolHandLuke
CoolHandLuke
Andrew Priddy
Replies
23
Views
6K
Andrew Priddy
Andrew Priddy
Mark Jackson
Replies
18
Views
5K
Mountain Goat
Mountain Goat
Top Bottom