The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Comparison of prosthetic models produced by traditional and additive manufacturing methods

  • Park, Jin-Young (Department of Dental Laboratory, Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Hae-Young (Department of Dental Laboratory, Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Ji-Hwan (Department of Dental Laboratory, Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Jae-Hong (Department of Dental Laboratory, Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Woong-Chul (Department of Dental Laboratory, Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University)
  • Received : 2014.12.15
  • Accepted : 2015.04.03
  • Published : 2015.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to verify the clinical-feasibility of additive manufacturing by comparing the accuracy of four different manufacturing methods for metal coping: the conventional lost wax technique (CLWT); subtractive methods with wax blank milling (WBM); and two additive methods, multi jet modeling (MJM), and micro-stereolithography (Micro-SLA). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty study models were created using an acrylic model with the maxillary upper right canine, first premolar, and first molar teeth. Based on the scan files from a non-contact blue light scanner (Identica; Medit Co. Ltd., Seoul, Korea), thirty cores were produced using the WBM, MJM, and Micro-SLA methods, respectively, and another thirty frameworks were produced using the CLWT method. To measure the marginal and internal gap, the silicone replica method was adopted, and the silicone images obtained were evaluated using a digital microscope (KH-7700; Hirox, Tokyo, Japan) at 140X magnification. Analyses were performed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc test (${\alpha}=.05$). RESULTS. The mean marginal gaps and internal gaps showed significant differences according to tooth type (P<.001 and P<.001, respectively) and manufacturing method (P<.037 and P<.001, respectively). Micro-SLA did not show any significant difference from CLWT regarding mean marginal gap compared to the WBM and MJM methods. CONCLUSION. The mean values of gaps resulting from the four different manufacturing methods were within a clinically allowable range, and, thus, the clinical use of additive manufacturing methods is acceptable as an alternative to the traditional lost wax-technique and subtractive manufacturing.

Keywords

References

  1. 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
  2. Abduo J, Lyons K, Bennamoun M. Trends in computer-aided manufacturing in prosthodontics: a review of the available streams. Int J Dent 2014;2014:783948.
  3. Colpani JT, Borba M, Della Bona A. Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of ceramic crown copings. Dent Mater 2013; 29:174-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.10.012
  4. Anunmana C, Charoenchitt M, Asvanund C. Gap comparison between single crown and three-unit bridge zirconia substructures. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:253-8. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.4.253
  5. Tamac E, Toksavul S, Toman M. Clinical marginal and internal adaptation of CAD/CAM milling, laser sintering, and cast metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:909-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.020
  6. Almeida e Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araujo E, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, Guth JF. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0987-2
  7. Song TJ, Kwon TK, Yang JH, Han JS, Lee JB, Kim SH, Yeo IS. Marginal fit of anterior 3-unit fixed partial zirconia restorations using different CAD/CAM systems. J Adv Prosthodont 2013;5:219-25. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2013.5.3.219
  8. Srikakula NK, Babu CS, Reddy JRK, Saiprasad SH, Raju ASR. Comparision of marginal fit of zirconium oxide copings generated using four different CAD-CAM systems-an in vitro study. J Res Adv Dent 2014;3:163-71.
  9. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Luthy H, Hammerle CH. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 2007;20:383-8.
  10. Bornemann G, Lemelson S, Luthardt R. Innovative method for the analysis of the internal 3D fitting accuracy of Cerec-3 crowns. Int J Comput Dent 2002;5:177-82.
  11. Stanojevic M, Sljivic M, Plancak M, Djurdjevic D. Advanced investigation on rapid prototyping techniques in maxillofacial surgery and implanting preparation. J Technol Plast 2014;39: 11-20.
  12. Snyder TJ, Andrews M, Weislogel M, Moeck P, Stone-Sundberg J, Birkes D, Hoffert MP, Lindeman A, Morrill J, Fercak O, Friedman S, Gunderson J, Ha A, McCollister J, Chen Y, Geile J, Wollman A, Attari B, Botnen N, Vuppuluri V, Shim J, Kaminsky W, Adams D, Graft J. 3D systems' technology overview and new applications in manufacturing, engineering, science, and education free access. 3D Pr Addit Manuf 2014;1:169-76. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2014.1502
  13. Sachs C, Groesser J, Stadelmann M, Schweiger J, Erdelt K, Beuer F. Full-arch prostheses from translucent zirconia: accuracy of fit. Dent Mater 2014;30:817-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.05.001
  14. Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M. Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 2008;24:1311-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.02.011
  15. Kim KB, Kim WC, Kim HY, Kim JH. An evaluation of marginal fit of three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated by direct metal laser sintering system. Dent Mater 2013;29:e91-6.
  16. Ortorp A, Jonsson D, Mouhsen A, Vult von Steyern P. The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2011;27:356-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.11.015
  17. Kim KB, Kim JH, Kim WC, Kim JH. In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of three-unit fixed dental prostheses produced by stereolithography. Dent Mater J 2014;33:504-9. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2014-017
  18. Huang Z, Zhang L, Zhu J, Zhao Y, Zhang X. Clinical Marginal and Internal Fit of Crowns Fabricated Using Different CAD/CAM Technologies. J Prosthodont 2015;24; 291-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12209
  19. Kokubo Y, Ohkubo C, Tsumita M, Miyashita A, Vult von Steyern P, Fukushima S. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:526-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01458.x
  20. Nakamura T, Nonaka M, Maruyama T. In vitro fitting accuracy of copy-milled alumina cores and all-ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:189-93.
  21. Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, Sorensen J. Marginal and internal fits of fixed dental prostheses zirconia retainers. Dent Mater 2009;25:94-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.04.018
  22. Pelekanos S, Koumanou M, Koutayas SO, Zinelis S, Eliades G. Micro-CT evaluation of the marginal fit of different In-Ceram alumina copings. Eur J Esthet Dent 2009;4:278-92.
  23. Neves FD, Prado CJ, Prudente MS, Carneiro TA, Zancope K, Davi LR, Mendonca G, Cooper LF, Soares CJ. Microcomputed tomography evaluation of marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated by using chairside CAD/CAM systems or the heat-pressing technique. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112:1134-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.028
  24. Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G. Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns-validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:116-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2003.01203.x
  25. Fransson B, Oilo G, Gjeitanger R. The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1985;1:197-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(85)80019-1
  26. 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
  27. 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
  28. Beuer F, Neumeier P, Naumann M. Marginal fit of 14-unit zirconia fixed dental prosthesis retainers. J Oral Rehabil 2009; 36:142-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2008.01908.x
  29. Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kastner K, Walter MH. Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:419-24. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.109125

Cited by

  1. 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
  2. Evaluation of marginal and internal gaps of Ni-Cr and Co-Cr alloy copings manufactured by microstereolithography vol.9, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.3.176
  3. Evaluation of marginal and internal gaps in single and three-unit metal frameworks made by micro-stereolithography vol.9, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.4.239
  4. pilot study vol.9, pp.5, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.341
  5. Evaluation of marginal and internal gap of three-unit metal framework according to subtractive manufacturing and additive manufacturing of CAD/CAM systems vol.9, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.6.463
  6. Assessment of hair surface roughness using quantitative image analysis pp.0909752X, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/srt.12393
  7. 구강 내 스캐너와 구강 외 스캐너를 사용하여 취득된 스캔 데이터 정확도 비교 vol.37, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2015.37.4.191
  8. New Approaches in Computer Aided Printing Technologies vol.19, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7126/cumudj.298920
  9. 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
  10. 비접촉식 구강외 스캐너와 비디오방식 구강내 스캐너를 이용하여 제작된 보철물의 내면정확도 비교 vol.41, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2019.41.4.263
  11. Evaluation of the marginal fit of metal copings fabricated by using 3 different CAD-CAM techniques: Milling, stereolithography, and 3D wax printer vol.124, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.09.002
  12. Marginal and internal fit of 3D printed provisional crowns according to build directions vol.12, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.4.225
  13. Accuracy evaluation of complete-arch models manufactured by three different 3D printing technologies: a three-dimensional analysis vol.65, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.jpor_2019_579
  14. Current standards and ethical landscape of engineered tissues-3D bioprinting perspective vol.12, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1177/20417314211027677
  15. Development, implementation and optimization of a mobile 3D printing platform vol.6, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-020-00154-2
  16. The Structure of the Surface Layer of 0.4C-1Cr Structural Steel after Finishing Stages of Machining by Cutting vol.12, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1134/s2075113321030291
  17. Assessment of internal fit and micro leakage of conventionally fabricated ceramometallic restoration versus CAD wax and press veneering (in-vitro study) vol.7, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-021-00072-7