In-vitro evaluation of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated using digital scanning technologies
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. This study aimed to compare the marginal and internal fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations that were designed by using the data obtained with the aid of intraoral and laboratory scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS. For the fabrication of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations using impressions taken from the maxillary master cast, plaster cast was created and scanned in laboratory scanners (InEos X5 and D900L). The main cast was also scanned with different intraoral scanners (Omnicam [OMNI], Primescan [PS], Trios 3 [T3], Trios 4 [T4]) (n = 12 per group). Zirconia fixed partial dentures were virtually designed, produced from presintered block, and subsequently sintered. Marginal and internal discrepancy values (in μm) were measured by using silicone replica method under stereomicroscope. Data were statistically analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis tests (P <.05). RESULTS. In terms of marginal adaptation, the measurements on the canine tooth indicated better performance with intraoral scanners than those in laboratory scanners, but there was no difference among intraoral scanners (P <.05). In the premolar tooth, PS had the lowest marginal (86.9 ± 19.2 μm) and axial (92.4 ± 14.8 μm), and T4 had the lowest axio-occlusal (89.4 ± 15.6 μm) and occlusal (89.1 ± 13.9 μm) discrepancy value. In both canine and premolar teeth, the D900L was found to be the most marginally and internally inconsistent scanner. CONCLUSION. Within the limits of the study, marginal and internal discrepancy values were generally lower in intraoral scanners than in laboratory scanners. Marginal discrepancy values of scanners were clinically acceptable (< 120 μm), except D900L.
Abstract
PURPOSE. This study aimed to compare the marginal and internal fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations that were designed by using the data obtained with the aid of intraoral and laboratory scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS. For the fabrication of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations using impressions taken from the maxillary master cast, plaster cast was created and scanned in laboratory scanners (InEos X5 and D900L). The main cast was also scanned with different intraoral scanners (Omnicam [OMNI], Primescan [PS], Trios 3 [T3], Trios 4 [T4]) (n = 12 per group). Zirconia fixed partial dentures were virtually designed, produced from presintered block, and subsequently sintered. Marginal and internal discrepancy values (in μm) were measured by using silicone replica method under stereomicroscope. Data were statistically analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis tests (P <.05). RESULTS. In terms of marginal adaptation, the measurements on the canine tooth indicated better performance with intraoral scanners than those in laboratory scanners, but there was no difference among intraoral scanners (P <.05). In the premolar tooth, PS had the lowest marginal (86.9 ± 19.2 μm) and axial (92.4 ± 14.8 μm), and T4 had the lowest axio-occlusal (89.4 ± 15.6 μm) and occlusal (89.1 ± 13.9 μm) discrepancy value. In both canine and premolar teeth, the D900L was found to be the most marginally and internally inconsistent scanner. CONCLUSION. Within the limits of the study, marginal and internal discrepancy values were generally lower in intraoral scanners than in laboratory scanners. Marginal discrepancy values of scanners were clinically acceptable (< 120 μm), except D900L.
참고문헌 (50)
- Marchack BW, "Complete and partial contour zirconia designs for crowns and fixed dental prostheses : a clinical report", J Prosthet Dent, 106, pp.145~152 (2011)
- Silva NR, "Reliability of metalloceramic and zirconia-based ceramic crowns", J Dent Res, 89, pp.1051~1056 (2010)
- Miyazaki T, "A review of dental CAD", CAM : current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience, 2009, pp.28, 44~56
- Memari Y, "Marginal adaptation of CAD", CAM all-ceramic crowns made by different impression methods : a literature review, 2019, pp.28, e536~44
- Syrek A, "Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling", J Dent, 38, pp.553~559 (2010)
- Galhano GÁ, "Optical impression systems for CAD-CAM restorations", J Craniofac Surg, 23, pp.e575~e579 (2012)
- Park GH, "Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete-arch digital scan", J Prosthet Dent, 121, pp.803~810 (2019)
- Ender A, "Accuracy of complete-and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro", Int J Comput Dent, 22, pp.11~19 (2019)
- Ahlholm P, "Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics:a review", J Prosthodont, 27, pp.35~41 (2018)
- Mangano FG, "Trueness and precision of 5intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants : a comparative in vitro study", BMC Oral Health, 19, pp.101~ (2019)
- Yuming Chen, "Influence of Liquid on the Tooth Surface on the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study", Journal of Prosthodontics, 31(1), pp.59~64 (2021), Wiley[DOI]
- Erozan Ç, "Evaluation of the precision of different intraoral scanner-Computer Aided Design(CAD)software combinations in digital dentistry", Med Sci Monit, 26, pp.e918529~ (2020)
- Oh KC, "Effects of scanning strategy and scanner type on the accuracy of intraoral scans : A new approach for assessing the accuracy of scanned data", J Prosthodont, 29, pp.518~523 (2020)
- Son K, "Effect of finish line locations of tooth preparation on the accuracy of intraoral scanners", Int J Comput Dent, 24, pp.29~40 (2021)
- Revilla-León M, "Intraoral digital scans-Part 1 : Influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the accuracy(trueness and precision)of different intraoral scanners", J Prosthet Dent, 124, pp.372~378 (2020)
- Kang B, "Accuracy of five intraoral scanners and two laboratory scanners for a complete arch : A comparative in vitro study", Appl Sci, 10, pp.74~ (2020)
- 박지만, "Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form", The Journal of Advanced of Prosthodontics, 8(5), pp.354~362 (2016), 대한치과보철학회[DOI]
- Contrepois M, "Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns : a systematic review", J Prosthet Dent, 110, pp.447~454.e10 (2013)
- Goldberg AJ, "Deterioration of restorative materials and the risk for secondary caries", Adv Dent Res, 4, pp.14~18 (1990)
- Rödiger M, "Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study", Clin Oral Investig, 21, pp.579~587 (2017)
- Önöral Ö, "Influence of repeated firings on marginal, axial, axio-occlusal, and occlusal fit of metal-ceramic restorations fabricated with different techniques", J Prosthet Dent, 120, pp.415~420 (2018)
- McLean JW, "The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique", Br Dent J, 131, pp.107~111 (1971)
- Holmes JR, "Marginal fit of castable ceramic crowns", J Prosthet Dent, 67, pp.594~599 (1992)
- Schaefer O, "Three-dimensional fit of lithium disilicate partial crowns in vitro", J Dent, 41, pp.271~277 (2013)
- Hung SH, "Marginal fit of porcelain-fused-to-metal and two types of ceramic crown", J Prosthet Dent, 63, pp.26~31 (1990)
- Arezoobakhsh A, "Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit zirconia frameworks fabricated with CAD-CAM technology using direct and indirect digital scans", J Prosthet Dent, 123, pp.105~112 (2020)
- Su TS, "Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression", J Prosthet Dent, 116, pp.362~367 (2016)
- Bosniac P, "Comparison of an indirect impression scanning system and two direct intraoral scanning systems in vivo", Clin Oral Investig, 23, pp.2421~2427 (2019)
- Lee B, "Evaluation of the fit of zirconia copings fabricated by direct and indirect digital scanning procedures", J Prosthet Dent, 120, pp.225~231 (2018)
- Park JS, "Clinical Evaluation of time efficiency and fit accuracy of lithium disilicate single crowns between conventional and digital impression", Materials (Basel), 13, pp.5467~ (2020)
- Holmes JR, "Considerations in measurement of marginal fit", J Prosthet Dent, 62, pp.405~408 (1989)
- Dutton E, "The effect different substrates have on the trueness and precision of eight different intraoral scanners", J Esthet Restor Dent, 32, pp.204~218 (2020)
- Abdel-Azim T, "Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD", CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners, 2015, pp.114, 554~559
- Kocaağaoğlu H, "Effect of digital impressions and production protocols on the adaptation of zirconia copings", J Prosthet Dent, 117, pp.102~108 (2017)
- Rinke S, "Multifactorial analysis of the impact of different man-ufacturing processes on the marginal fit of zirconia copings", Dent Mater J, 31, pp.601~609 (2012)
- Benic GI, "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, 121, pp.426~431 (2019)
- Almeida e Silva JS, "Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques", Clin Oral Investig, 18, pp.515~523 (2014)
- Malaguti G, "In vitro evaluation of prosthodontic impression on natural dentition: a comparison between traditional and digital techniques", Oral Implantol(Rome), 9, pp.21~27 (2017)
- Berrendero S, "Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD", CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns, 2016, pp.20, 2403~2410
- Nedelcu R, "Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method", J Dent, 69, pp.110~118 (2018)
- Boeddinghaus M, "Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients", Clin Oral Investig, 19, pp.2027~2034 (2015)
- Wismeijer D, "Group 5 ITI Consensus Report : Digital technologies", Clin Oral Implants Res, 29, pp.436~442 (2018)
- Shembesh M, "An in vitro comparison of the marginal adaptation accuracy of CAD", CAM restorations using different impression systems, 2017, pp.26, 581~586
- Shimizu S, "The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of fixed dental prostheses", Dent Mater J, 36, pp.402~407 (2017)
- Özçelik TB, "Marginal adaptation of provisional CAD", CAM restorations fabricated using various simulated digital cement space settings, 2018, pp.33, 1064~1069
- Euán R, "Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings : influence of the CAD", CAM system and the finish line design, 2014, pp.112, 155~162
- Suzuki S, "Marginal and internal fit of three-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses:Effects of prosthesis design, cement space, and zirconia type", J Prosthodont Res, 64, pp.460~467 (2020)
- Kokubo Y, "Clinical marginal and internal gaps of zirconia all-ceramic crowns", J Prosthodont Res, 55, pp.40~43 (2011)
- Shillingburg HT, "Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics", pp.120~ (1997), Quintessence Publishing
- Komine F, "Marginal and internal adaptation of zirconium dioxide ceramic copings and crowns with different finish line designs", Dent Mater J, 26, pp.659~664 (2007)