The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Marginal fit of anterior 3-unit fixed partial zirconia restorations using different CAD/CAM systems

  • Song, Tae-Jin (Seoul Highan Dental Clinic) ;
  • Kwon, Taek-Ka (Department of Dentistry, St. Vincent Hospital, Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Yang, Jae-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Han, Jung-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Jai-Bong (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Sung-Hun (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yeo, In-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2012.10.02
  • Published : 2013.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. Few studies have investigated the marginal accuracy of 3-unit zirconia fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system. The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal fit of zirconia FPDs made using two CAD/CAM systems with that of metal-ceramic FPDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Artificial resin maxillary central and lateral incisors were prepared for 3-unit FPDs and fixed in yellow stone. This model was duplicated to epoxy resin die. On the resin die, 15 three-unit FPDs were fabricated per group (45 in total): Group A, zirconia 3-unit FPDs made with the Everest system; Group B, zirconia 3-unit FPDs made with the Lava system; and Group C, metal-ceramic 3-unit FPDs. They were cemented to resin dies with resin cement. After removal of pontic, each retainer was separated and observed under a microscope (Presize 440C). Marginal gaps of experimental groups were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Duncan test. RESULTS. Mean marginal gaps of 3-unit FPDs were $60.46{\mu}m$ for the Everest group, $78.71{\mu}m$ for the Lava group, and $81.32{\mu}m$ for the metal-ceramic group. The Everest group demonstrated significantly smaller marginal gap than the Lava and the metal-ceramic groups (P<.05). The marginal gap did not significantly differ between the Lava and the metal-ceramic groups (P>.05). CONCLUSION. The marginal gaps of anterior 3-unit zirconia FPD differed according to CAD/CAM systems, but still fell within clinically acceptable ranges compared with conventional metal-ceramic restoration.

Keywords

References

  1. Sorensen JA. A rationale for comparison of plaque-retaining properties of crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:264-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90329-6
  2. Sorensen SE, Larsen IB, Jörgensen KD. Gingival and alveolar bone reaction to marginal fit of subgingival crown margins. Scand J Dent Res 1986;94:109-14.
  3. Abbate MF, Tjan AH, Fox WM. Comparison of the marginal fit of various ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 61:527-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90270-9
  4. Yeo IS, Yang JH, Lee JB. In vitro marginal fit of three all-ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:459-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.08.005
  5. Gonzalo E, Suarez MJ, Serrano B, Lozano JF. A comparison of the marginal vertical discrepancies of zirconium and metal ceramic posterior fixed dental prostheses before and after cementation. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:378-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60198-0
  6. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 1971;131: 107-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4802708
  7. Belser UC, MacEntee MI, Richter WA. Fit of three porcelain- fused-to-metal marginal designs in vivo: a scanning electron microscope study. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53:24-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90058-7
  8. Coli P, Karlsson S. Precision of a CAD/CAM technique for the production of zirconium dioxide copings. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:577-80.
  9. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Spiekermann H, Anusavice KJ. Marginal fit of alumina-and zirconia-based fixed partial dentures produced by a CAD/CAM system. Oper Dent 2001;26:367-74.
  10. Beuer F, Naumann M, Gernet W, Sorensen JA. Precision of fit: zirconia three-unit fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Investig 2009;13:343-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-008-0224-6
  11. Reich S, Wichmann M, Nkenke E, Proeschel P. Clinical fit of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures, generated with three different CAD/CAM systems. Eur J Oral Sci 2005;113: 174-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2004.00197.x
  12. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Lüthy H, Hammerle CH. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 2007;20:383-8.
  13. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Luthy H, Gauckler LJ, Scharer P, Franz Hammerle CH. Prospective clinical study of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 3-year follow-up. Quintessence Int 2006;37:685-93.
  14. Wettstein F, Sailer I, Roos M, Hämmerle CH. Clinical study of the internal gaps of zirconia and metal frameworks for fixed partial dentures. Eur J Oral Sci 2008;116:272-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00527.x
  15. Kohorst P, Brinkmann H, Li J, Borchers L, Stiesch M. Marginal accuracy of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses fabricated using different computer-aided design/computer- aided manufacturing systems. Eur J Oral Sci 2009;117: 319-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2009.00622.x
  16. Abduo J, Lyons K, Swain M. Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2010;37:866-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02113.x
  17. Okutan M, Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Fracture load and marginal fit of shrinkage-free $ZrSiO_4$ all-ceramic crowns after chewing simulation. J Oral Rehabil 2006;33:827-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01637.x
  18. Gonzalo E, Suarez MJ, Serrano B, Lozano JF. Comparative analysis of two measurement methods for marginal fit in metal-ceramic and zirconia posterior FPDs. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22:374-7.
  19. Vigolo P, Fonzi F. An in vitro evaluation of fit of zirconiumoxide- based ceramic four-unit fixed partial dentures, generated with three different CAD/CAM systems, before and after porcelain firing cycles and after glaze cycles. J Prosthodont 2008;17:621-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00366.x
  20. Kohorst P, Brinkmann H, Dittmer MP, Borchers L, Stiesch M. Influence of the veneering process on the marginal fit of zirconia fixed dental prostheses. J Oral Rehabil 2010;37:283-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02053.x
  21. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008;204:505-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.350
  22. Witkowski S, Komine F, Gerds T. Marginal accuracy of titanium copings fabricated by casting and CAD/CAM techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96:47-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.05.013
  23. Bindl A, Mormann WH. Marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic CAD/CAM crown-copings on chamfer preparations. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:441-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01446.x
  24. Tuntiprawon M, Wilson PR. The effect of cement thickness on the fracture strength of all-ceramic crowns. Aust Dent J 1995;40:17-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.1995.tb05607.x
  25. Belles DM, Cronin RJ Jr, Duke ES. Effect of metal design and technique on the marginal characteristics of the collarless metal ceramic restoration. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:611-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90193-Z
  26. Yoon JW, Yang JH, Han JS, Lee JB. A study on the marginal fit of collarless metal ceramic fixed partial dentures. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2005;43:707-16.
  27. Bindl A, Mormann WH. Fit of all-ceramic posterior fixed partial denture frameworks in vitro. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007;27:567-75.
  28. Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Richter J, Edelhoff D, Gernet W. Influence of preparation angle on marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia crown copings. Quintessence Int 2009;40:243-50.
  29. Att W, Komine F, Gerds T, Strub JR. Marginal adaptation of three different zirconium dioxide three-unit fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:239-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60047-0
  30. Rosentritt M, Behr M, Kolbeck C, Handel G. Marginal integrity of CAD/CAM fixed partial dentures. Eur J Dent 2007;1: 25-30.
  31. May KB, Russell MM, Razzoog ME, Lang BR. Precision of fit: the Procera AllCeram crown. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80: 394-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70002-2
  32. Leong D, Chai J, Lautenschlager E, Gilbert J. Marginal fit of machine-milled titanium and cast titanium single crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1994;7:440-7.
  33. Sulaiman F, Chai J, Jameson LM, Wozniak WT. A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress, and Procera crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:478-84.
  34. Stappert CF, Dai M, Chitmongkolsuk S, Gerds T, Strub JR. Marginal adaptation of three-unit fixed partial dentures constructed from pressed ceramic systems. Br Dent J 2004;196: 766-70. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811390

Cited by

  1. Comparison of prosthetic models produced by traditional and additive manufacturing methods vol.7, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2015.7.4.294
  2. A comparative study of marginal fit of copings prepared with various techniques on different implant abutments vol.35, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2015-252
  3. Fit of CAD/CAM Tooth-supported Single Crowns and Fixed Dental Prostheses vol.4, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40496-017-0139-x
  4. Evaluation of the marginal and internal gaps of three different dental prostheses: comparison of the silicone replica technique and three-dimensional superimposition analysis vol.9, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.3.159
  5. Alternative Method to Evaluate the Adaptation of Implant-Supported Multi-Unit Prosthetic Frameworks pp.1059941X, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12644
  6. Micro-CT Analysis of Y-TZP Copings Made by Different CAD/CAM Systems: Marginal and Internal Fit vol.2018, pp.1687-8736, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5189767
  7. A review of additive manufacturing in conservative dentistry and endodontics part 2: applications in restorative dentistry and endodontics vol.46, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2019.46.3.248
  8. 다양한 CAD/CAM 방식으로 제작한 금속하부구조물 간의 변연 및 내면 적합도 비교 연구 vol.57, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.3.211
  9. Mechanical Properties of CoCr Dental-Prosthesis Restorations Made by Three Manufacturing Processes. Influence of the Microstructure and Topography vol.10, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/met10060788
  10. Influence of the CAD-CAM Systems on the Marginal Accuracy and Mechanical Properties of Dental Restorations vol.17, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124276
  11. How adjustment could affect internal and marginal adaptation of CAD/CAM crowns made with different materials vol.12, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.6.344