Journal of Technologic Dentistry (대한치과기공학회지)

Korean Academy of Dental Technology (대한치과기공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the marginal fit of POM restorations with different thickness of metal copings

코핑 두께의 차이에 따른 POM 보철물의 변연적합도 연구

  • Lim, Hyung-Tek (Dental laboratory of Dentistry, Hanyang University Hospital)
  • 임형택 (한양대학교병원 치과기공실)
  • Received : 2012.04.30
  • Accepted : 2012.06.26
  • Published : 2012.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the marginal fit of POM restorations with 3 different thickness of metal coping. Methods: 2.0mm Occlusal reduction, 1.0mm preparation of axial wall with 6degree taper, and chamfer margin was prepared a maxillary first premolar on dentiform. Duplicate prepared die and, make 30 individual dies with Ni-Cr metal. Make 3 groups of 30 press ceramic on Metal crown with different thickness of metal coping; 10 of 0.1mm, 10 of 0.3mm, 10 of 0.5mm thickness metal coping. The marginal fit of the crowns was evaluated 50 points per 1 crown, around the crown margin circumference under a optical microscope at original magnification ${\times}100$. A 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare data. Results: The mean marginal discrepancy for POM with 0.1mm metal copings was $72.56{\mu}m$, $67.83{\mu}m$ for 0.3mm metal coping POMs, and $72.56{\mu}m$ for 0.5mm metal coping POM. The 1-way ANOVA showed significant difference among 3 groups. Conclusion: The marginal fit of pressed-on-metal (POMs) was best with 0.3mm thickness of metal coping, fallowing by 0.1mm, and 0.5mm in the order.

Keywords

References

  1. 김윤영, 박원희, 유동엽, 이영수. 열-가압을 이용한 금속 도재관과 전통적인 금속 도재관의 변연 적합도 비교연구. 대한치과보철학회지, 48(4), 273-279, 2010.
  2. American Dental Association, ANSI/ADA Specification No. 8 for zinc phosphate cement. In Guide to Dental Materials and Devices (ed 5). Chicago, IL: American Dental Association, 87-88, 1970-1971.
  3. Bjorn AL, Bjorn H, Grkovic B. Marginal fit of restorations and its relation to perioddental bone level. Part II. Crowns. Odontol Revy. 21, 337-346, 1970.
  4. Carter JM, Sorensen SE, Johnson RR, Teitelbaum RL, Levine MS. Punch shear testing of extracted vital and endodontically treated teeth. J Biomech. 16, 841-848, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(83)90008-8
  5. Gassino G, Barone Monfin S, Scanu M, Spina G, Preti G. Marginal adaptation of fixed prosthodontics: a new in vitro 360-degree external examination procedure. Int J Prosthodont. 17, 218-223, 2004.
  6. Gemalmaz D, Alkumru HN. Marginal fit changes during porcelain firing cycles. J Prosthet Dent. 73, 49-54, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80272-0
  7. Groten M, Axmann D, Poster L, Weber H. Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurement required for practical in vitro testing. J Prosthet Dent. 83, 40-49, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(00)70087-4
  8. Mclean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 131, 107-111, 1971. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4802708
  9. Pera P, Bassi F, Carossa S. In vitro marginal adaptation of alumina porcelain ceramic crown. J Prosthet Dent. 72, 585-590, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(94)90289-5
  10. Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Fisher DW. Preperation design and marginal distortion in porcelain-fused- to-metal restorations. Prosthet Dent, 29, 276-84, 1973. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(73)90007-3
  11. Sorensen JA. A standardized method for determination of crown margin fidelity. J Prosthet Dent, 64, 18-24, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90147-5
  12. Waerhaug J. Tissue reactions around artificial crowns. J periodontal, 24, 172-185, 1963.
  13. White SN, Kipnis V. Effect of adhesive luting agents on the marginal seating of cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent, 69, 28-31, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90235-G
  14. Wu JC, Wilson PR. Optimal cement space of resin luting cement. Int J Prosthodont, 7, 209-215, 1994.