Assessment of Fit on Ten Screw-Retained FrameworksRealized through Digital Full-Arch Implant Impression  
[PERSON]  
1 Department of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, Section of Prosthodontics and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (M.D.F.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (E.S.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (S.G.); [PERSON](S.M.); [PERSON])  
[PERSON]  
1 Department of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, Section of Prosthodontics and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (M.D.F.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (E.S.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (S.G.); [PERSON](S.M.); [PERSON])  
[PERSON]  
1 Department of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, Section of Prosthodontics and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (M.D.F.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (E.S.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (S.G.); [PERSON](S.M.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (F.S.L)  
[PERSON]  
1 Department of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, Section of Prosthodontics and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (M.D.F.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (E.S.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (S.G.); [PERSON](S.M.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (F.S.L)  
[PERSON]  
1 Department of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, Section of Prosthodontics and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (M.D.F.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (E.S.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (S.G.); [PERSON](S.M.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (F.S.L)  
[PERSON]  
2 Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DIBINEM), Division of Prosthodonics and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, Alma Mater Studiorum--University of Bologna, 40121 Bologna, Italy; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (Correspondence: [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (Correspondence: adolfo.difore@unipd.  
To the best of the authors' knowledge, there are three articles that have investigated in vivo the accuracy of the digital impression for full-arch implant-supported FDPs [18; 19; 20]. In two articles, the authors compared the implant-supported FDPs on four implants realized using digital and traditional impressions through panoramic radiographs during the follow-up examinations. No signs of misfit were identified among the framework and implants [18; 19]. However, the third clinical trial compared the accuracy of digital versus conventional full-arch implant impressions of dedentulous patients [20]. The authors demonstrated the possibility of fabricating a maxillary fixed complete denture using a digital impression. However, the authors did not realize frameworks but calculated the 3D deviations between the Standard Tessellation Language (STL) files from the intraoral digital scan and the STL files from extraoral digitalized final stone casts.  
Clinical assessment of the passive fit between framework and implants is difficult [21]. Several methods have been suggested, but they all have their limitations. However, the Sheffield test, radiographs, visual inspection, and tactile sensation are considered the most common clinical evaluation methods [21; 22; 23] and are sometimes used in laboratory research [24]. The fit of implant-supported FDPs made from the conventional impression is well described in the literature [15; 24], while there is a lack of research regarding the clinical evaluation of the fit of full-arch implant-supported FDPs realized through the digital workflow.  
Therefore, the aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate the fit of screw-retained milled frameworks on six implants realized from digital impressions through the Sheffield test and radiographs. Moreover, the misfit value was measured using a microscope on a printed master model. The null hypothesis was that all the frameworks would show comparable fit without any difference.