COMPARISON OF ACCURACY OF THREE-UNIT ZIRCONIA FIXED PARTIAL DENTURES MADE FROM CONVENTIONAL AND DIGITAL IMPRESSIONS – IN VITRO STUDY
Аннотация
ABSTRACTINTRODUCTION: Nowadays, the improvement of intraoral scanning systems aims to overcome some limitations of the conventional methods and to eliminate the mistakes that can be made during the production technology and to achieve a more precise design of prosthetic restorations [7].
AIM: The aim of the present study is to evaluate and compare the marginal adaptation and the internal fit of zirconium dioxide fixed partial dentures, made by direct and indirect digital approach.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To perform the in vitro study, a model-sample of the upper jaw was used, on which two artificial plastic teeth 24 and 26 were prepared and tooth 25 was removed. 30 virtual models were created from the prepared model. To obtain the virtual models in the first group (CIS group), 10 conventional impressions (n = 10) were taken with additive silicone impression material using a two-stage two-phase impression technique with a standard metal impression tray. For the second group (PCS group) the conventional impressions were casted wtih IV class high quality hard plaster. The ten digital impressions from the third group (ISG group) were obtained using an intraoral TRIOS scanner.
RESULTS: The highest mean value in P1 was measured in the CIS group (155.1 ± 69.96 µm), followed by the PCS group (135.62 ± 78.7 µm). The highest mean value in P2 was obtained in the CIS group (138.32 ± 63.08 µm), followed by the ISG group (117.2 ± 32.48 µm). The highest mean value in point P3 was found in the CIS group (94.525 ± 23.03 µm), while the highest mean value in point P4 was measured in the PCS group (86.34 ± 26.99 µm).
CONCLUSION: The obtained mean values regarding the marginal adaptation in all studied groups are within the clinically acceptable range. The highest values in terms of the marginal adaptation indicator were obtained in the PCS group, and the lowest - in the ISG group.
Литература
2. Rekow D. Computer-aided design and manufacturing in dentistry: a review of the state of the art. J Prosthet Dent, 1987, 58(4), p.512–6
3. Andersson M, Carlsson L, Persson M, Bergman B. Accuracy of machine milling and spark erosion with a CAD/CAM system. J Prosthet Dent, 1996; 76(2), p.187–93.
4. Duret F, Preston J.D. CAD/CAM imaging in dentistry. Curr Opin Dent, 1991, 1(2), p. 150–4
5. Davidowitz G, Kotick P.G. The Use of CAD/CAM in Dentistry. Dental Clinics of North America, 2011, 55(3), p.559-570
6. Luthardt RG, Kühmstedt P, Walter MH. A new method for the computer- aided evaluation of threedimensional changes in gypsum materials. Dent Mater, 2003,19:19-24
7. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y (2009) A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 28: 44-56.
8. Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G. Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns— validation of the silicone replica method. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2008;35:116–22
9. Boening K., Wolf B., Schmidt A., Kästner K., Walter M. Clinical fit of procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:419-24
10. Almeida e Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araújo É, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, et al. Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18:515-23
11. Karlsson S. The fit of Procera titanium crowns. An in vitro and clinical study. Acta Odontol Scand, 1993, 51, p.129-3
12. Oden A., M. Andersson, I. Krystek-Ondracek, D. Magnusson. Five-year clinical evaluation of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent, 1998, 80, p.450-6 13. May K.B., M.M. Russell, M.E. Razzog, B.R. Lang. Precision of fit: the Procera AllCeram crown. J Prosthet Dent, 1998, 80, p.394-404c
14. White SN, Ingles S, Kipnis V. Influence of marginal opening on microleakage of cemented artificial crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:257-64
15. Nawafleh NA, Mack F, Evans J, Mackay J, Hatamleh MM. Accuracy and reliability of methods to measure marginal adaptation of crowns and FDPs: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2013;22:419-28
16. Euán R, Figueras-Álvarez O, CabratosaTermes J, Oliver-Parra R. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: infuence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. J Prosthet Dent
2014;112: 155-62
17. Kim T-G, Kim S, Choi H, Lee J-H, Kim J-H,
Moon H-S. Clinical acceptability of the internal gap of CAD/CAM PD-AG crowns using intraoral digital impressions. Biomed Res Int 2016;2016:1-6
18. Vennerstrom M, Fakhary M, Von Steyern PV. The fit of crowns produced using digital impression systems. Swed Dent J 2014;38:101-10
19. Cetik S, Bahrami B, Fossoyeux I, Atash R. Adaptation of zirconia crowns created by conventional versus optical impression: in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9:208-16
20. Tsirogiannis P, Reissmann DR, Heydecke G. Evaluation of the marginal fit of single-unit, completecoverage ceramic restorations fabricated after digital and conventional impressions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:328-35
21. Zarauz C, Valverde A, Martinez-Rus F, et al: Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:799-806
22. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry I, Thomas GW, et al. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthodont 2014;23:610-7
23. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry IL, Thomas GW, et al. Internal fit of pressed and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impres- sions. J Prosthet Dent 2015;113:304-9
24. Koulivand S, Ghodsi S, Siadat H, Alikhasi M. A clinical comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques regarding finish line locations and impression time. J Esthet Restor Dent 2020;32:236-43
25. Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F. Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impressionda split-mouth randomised clinical study. Clin Oral Investig 2019;23:4043-50
26. Benic GI, Sailer I, Zeltner M, Gütermann JN, Özcan M, Mühlemann S. Randomized controlled clinical trial of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of zirconia-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:426-31
27. Sakornwimon N, C. Leevailoj. Clinical marginal fir of zirconia crowns and pattients’ preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane. J Prosthet Dent.2017; 118:386-91
28. Zeltner M, Sailer I, Mühlemann S, Özcan M, Hämmerle CHF, Benic GI. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:354-62
29. Rödiger M, Heinitz A, Bürgers R, Rinke S. Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:579-87
30. Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:291-300
31. Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of single- tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions
in patients. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19:2027-34
CC BY-ND
Эта лицензия позволяет свободно распространять произведение, как на коммерческой, так некоммерческой основе, при этом работа должна оставаться неизменной и обязательно должно указываться авторство.
