The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of biogeneric design techniques with CEREC CAD/CAM system

  • Arslan, Yeliz (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University) ;
  • Nemli, Secil Karakoca (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University) ;
  • Gungor, Merve Bankoglu (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University) ;
  • Tamam, Evsen (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University) ;
  • Yilmaz, Handan (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University)
  • Received : 2015.04.22
  • Accepted : 2015.10.20
  • Published : 2015.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate occlusal contacts generated by 3 different biogeneric design modes (individual (BI), copy (BC), reference (BR)) of CEREC software and to assess the designs subjectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ten pairs of maxillary and mandibular casts were obtained from full dentate individuals. Gypsum cast contacts were quantified with articulating paper and digital impressions were taken. Then, all ceramic crown preparation was performed on the left first molar teeth and digital impressions of prepared teeth were made. BI, BC, and BR crowns were designed. Occlusal images of designs including occlusal contacts were superimposed on the gypsum cast images and corresponding contacts were determined. Three designs were evaluated by the students. RESULTS. The results of the study revealed that there was significant difference among the number of contacts of gypsum cast and digital models (P<.05). The comparison of the percentage of virtual contacts of three crown designs which were identical to the contacts of original gypsum cast revealed that BI and BR designs showed significantly higher percentages of identical contacts compared with BC design (P<.05). Subjective assessment revealed that students generally found BI designs and BR designs natural regarding naturalness of fissure morphology and cusp shape and cusp tip position. For general occlusal morphology, student groups generally found BI design "too strong" or "perfect", BC design "too weak", and BR design "perfect". CONCLUSION. On a prepared tooth, three different biogeneric design modes of a CAD/CAM software reveals different crown designs regarding occlusal contacts and morphology.

Keywords

References

  1. Ender A, Mormann WH, Mehl A. Efficiency of a mathematical model in generating CAD/CAM-partial crowns with natural tooth morphology. Clin Oral Investig 2011;15:283-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0384-z
  2. Kollmuss M, Jakob FM, Kirchner HG, Ilie N, Hickel R, Huth KC. Comparison of biogenerically reconstructed and waxedup complete occlusal surfaces with respect to the original tooth morphology. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:851-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0749-6
  3. Litzenburger AP, Hickel R, Richter MJ, Mehl AC, Probst FA. Fully automatic CAD design of the occlusal morphology of partial crowns compared to dental technicians’ design. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:491-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0714-4
  4. Mattiola A, Mormann WH, Lutz F. The computer-generated occlusion of Cerec-2 inlays and onlays. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 1995;105:1284-90.
  5. De Nisco S, Mormann WH. Computer-generated occlusion of Cerec2 inlays and overlays. In: Mormann WH, eds. Cad/Cam in aesthetic dentistry, Cerec 10 year anniversary symposium. Berlin; Quintessence; 1996. p. 391-407.
  6. Jedynakiewicz NM, Martin N. Functionally-generated pathway theory, application and development in Cerec restorations. Int J Comput Dent 2001;4:25-36.
  7. Mormann WH, Brandestini G. Die CEREC Computer Reconstruction Inlays, Onlays und Veneers. Berlin; Quintessenz; 1989. p. 75-97.
  8. Reich S, Wichmann M, Burgel P. The self-adjusting crown (SAC). Int J Comput Dent 2005;8:47-58.
  9. Hartung F, Kordass B. Comparison of the contact surface pattern between virtual and milled Cerec 3D full-ceramic crowns. Int J Comput Dent 2006;9:129-36.
  10. Turp JC, Greene CS, Strub JR. Dental occlusion: a critical reflection on past, present and future concepts. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:446-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01820.x
  11. Christensen GJ. Is occlusion becoming more confusing? A plea for simplicity. J Am Dent Assoc 2004;135:767-8, 770. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2004.0305
  12. Nemli SK, Wolfart S, Reich S. InLab and Cerec Connect: virtual contacts in maximum intercuspation compared with original contacts--an in vitro study. Int J Comput Dent 2012;15:23-31.
  13. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 2009;28:44-56. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.28.44
  14. DeLong R, Knorr S, Anderson GC, Hodges J, Pintado MR. Accuracy of contacts calculated from 3D images of occlusal surfaces. J Dent 2007;35:528-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2007.02.004
  15. Delong R, Ko CC, Anderson GC, Hodges JS, Douglas WH. Comparing maximum intercuspal contacts of virtual dental patients and mounted dental casts. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:622-30. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.129379
  16. Schenk O. Biogeneric-another step closer to nature. V3.8:largest update since introduction of the 3D software. Int J Comput Dent 2010;13:169-74.
  17. Akgungor G, Kilincaslan N, Sen D. Anterior single laminate veneer restoration using CEREC biogeneric reference design mode: case report. Key Eng Mater 2012;493-4:599-603.
  18. Akgungor G, Sen D, Bal E, Ozcan M. Simultaneous Replacement of Maxillary Central Incisors with CEREC Biogeneric Reference Technique: A Case Report. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2013;7:112-8.
  19. Probst FA, Mehl A. CAD reconstruction using contralateral mirrored anterior teeth: a 3-dimensional metric and visual evaluation. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:521-3.

Cited by

  1. CEREC Chairside System to Register and Design the Occlusion in Restorative Dentistry: A Systematic Literature Review vol.28, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12226
  2. In vivo evaluation of inter-operator reproducibility of digital dental and conventional impression techniques vol.12, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179188
  3. The Conometric Concept: A Two-Year Follow-Up of Fixed Partial CEREC Restorations Supported By Cone-In-Cone Abutments pp.1059941X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12962
  4. Chairside Restorations of Maxillary Anterior Teeth with CAD/CAM Porcelain Laminate Veneers Produced by Digital Workflow: A Case Report with a Step to Facilitate Restoration Design vol.2019, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6731905
  5. Automatic Digital Design of the Occlusal Anatomy of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Compared to Dental Technicians’ Digital Waxing: A Controlled Clinical Trial vol.30, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13268
  6. Step-by-Step Esthetic Rehabilitation with Chairside System vol.2021, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5558158