## 2 Methods
### Measurement Procedure  
After the abutment screws were removed (PGHYBN, BioHorizons, Birmingham, AL, USA), or after 5 min had passed, a postoperative micro-CT scan (Super Argus MicroCT, SEDECAL, Algate, Madrid, Spain) (STL2) was taken under the aforementioned exposure parameters. Next, the STL1 and STL2 digital files were imported into the reverse engineering morphometric software (3D Geomagic Capture Wrap v.2024, 3D Systems(r), Rock Hill, SC, USA), and the best-fit algorithm was used to align the digital STL files. The differences in volume between the STL1 and STL2 digital files were then analyzed to assess the wear volume. The tolerance between the alignment of the digital files was set at \(\pm\)10 \(\upmu\)m and the spectrum at \(\pm\)100 \(\upmu\)m. A maximum of 5 min of working time was allowed for recording the removal of the abutment screws from the dental implants. A unique operator with over 10 years of experience in prosthetic dentistry performed the various techniques for removing the abutment screws (P.M.-A.), and the measurement procedures were performed by another operator (A.Z.-M.), who was calibrated and blinded to the randomization process of the samples and who had performed the same digital measurement procedure in a previous study [8].  
The wear on the internal threads of the conical internal hex implant-abutment connection (4.6 \(\times\) 12 mm, TLX4612 BioHorizons, Birmingham, AL, USA) was analyzed by comparing the pre- and postoperative STL digital files after aligning the STL1 and STL2 digital files and calculating the volumetric differences (mm\({}^{3}\)) of the conventional technique (Figure 5B and video 1, [[https://youtu.be/eR76](https://youtu.be/eR76) VAanLt0]([https://youtu.be/eR76](https://youtu.be/eR76) VAanLt0) (\"(accessed on 23 September 2024)\")) and the Phibo (Figure 5C and video 2, ([[https://youtu.be/Bgb2](https://youtu.be/Bgb2) wMQHF_E]([https://youtu.be/Bgb2](https://youtu.be/Bgb2) wMQHF_E) \" (accessed on 23 September 2024)\"), Rhein83 (Figure 5D and video 3, ([[https://youtu.be/Raf1](https://youtu.be/Raf1) jdscNYs]([https://youtu.be/Raf1](https://youtu.be/Raf1) jdscNYs), (\"(accessed on 23 September 2024)\")), and Sanhigia (Figure 5E and video 4, [[https://youtu.be/va9](https://youtu.be/va9) fL47p-HE]([https://youtu.be/va9](https://youtu.be/va9) fL47p-HE), (\"(accessed on 23 September 2024)\")) drilling removal systems.  
Figure 4: (**A**) Dental implant embedded into the epoxy resin material with an intentionally fractured abutment screw; (**B**) exploration probe; (**C**) ultrasonic tip; and (**D**) Phibo, (**E**) Rhein83(r), and (**F**) Sanhigia® extractor kits used for the removal of the fractured abutment screw.  
Figure 5: (**A**) Procedure for aligning pre- and postoperative digital files and isolating the wear volume (red) of the damaged conical internal hex implant-abutment connection internal threads after removing the fractured abutment screws; (**B**) conventional technique with an exploration probe and an ultrasonic appliance; (**C**) Phibo drilling removal system without irrigation; (**D**) Rhein83® drilling removal system without irrigation; and (**E**) Sanhigia® drilling removal system without irrigation.