The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of marginal adaptation in three-unit frameworks fabricated with conventional and powder-free digital impression techniques

  • Received : 2019.05.15
  • Accepted : 2019.10.07
  • Published : 2019.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the marginal misfits of three-unit frameworks fabricated with conventional and digital impressions techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty brass canine and second premolar abutment preparations were fabricated by using a computer numerical control machine and were randomly divided into 3 groups (n=10) as follows: conventional impression group (Group Ci), Cerec Omnicam (Group Cdi), and 3shape TRIOS-3 (Group Tdi) digital impression groups. The laser-sintered metal frameworks were designed and fabricated with conventional and digital impressions. The marginal adaptation was assessed with a stereomicroscope at ${\times}30$ magnification. The data were analyzed with 1-way analysis of variances (ANOVAs) and the independent simple t tests. RESULTS. A statistically significant difference was found between the frameworks fabricated by conventional methods and those fabricated by digital impression methods. Multiple comparison results revealed that the frameworks in Group Ci (average, $98.8{\pm}16.43{\mu}m$; canine, $93.59{\pm}16.82{\mu}m$; premolar, $104.10{\pm}15.02{\mu}m$) had larger marginal misfit values than those in Group Cdi (average, $63.78{\pm}14.05{\mu}m$; canine, $62.73{\pm}13.71{\mu}m$; premolar, $64.84{\pm}15.06{\mu}m$) and Group Tdi (average, $65.14{\pm}18.05{\mu}m$; canine, $70.64{\pm}19.02{\mu}m$; premolar, $59.64{\pm}16.10{\mu}m$) (P=.000 for average; P=.001 for canine; P<.001 for premolar). No statistical difference was found between the marginal misfits of canine and premolar abutment teeth within the same groups (P>.05). CONCLUSION. The three-unit frameworks fabricated with digital impression techniques showed better marginal fit compared to conventional impression techniques. All marginal misfit values were clinically acceptable.

Keywords

References

  1. Walton TR. The up to 25-year survival and clinical performance of 2,340 high gold-based metal-ceramic single crowns. Int J Prosthodont 2013;26:151-60. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3136
  2. An S, Kim S, Choi H, Lee JH, Moon HS. Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1171-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.024
  3. Vennerstrom M, Fakhary M, Von Steyern PV. The fit of crowns produced using digital impression systems. Swed Dent J 2014;38:101-10.
  4. Seker E, Ozcelik TB, Rathi N, Yilmaz B. Evaluation of marginal fit of CAD/CAM restorations fabricated through cone beam computerized tomography and laboratory scanner data. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:47-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.006
  5. Borba M, Cesar PF, Griggs JA, Della Bona A. Adaptation of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Dent Mater 2011;27:1119-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.08.004
  6. Punj A, Bompolaki D, Garaicoa J. Dental Impression Materials and Techniques. Dent Clin North Am 2017;61:779-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.004
  7. Euan R, Figueras-Alvarez O, Cabratosa-Termes J, Oliver-Parra R. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:155-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.10.012
  8. Dahl BE, Dahl JE, Ronold HJ. Digital evaluation of marginal and internal fit of single-crown fixed dental prostheses. Eur J Oral Sci 2018;126:512-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12576
  9. Praca L, Pekamc FC, Regod RO, Radermacherc K, Wolfarta S, Marottia J. Accuracy of single crowns fabricated from ultrasound digital impressions. Dent Mater 2018;34:e280-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.08.301
  10. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry IL, Thomas GW, Qian F. Internal fit of pressed and computeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2015;113:304-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.015
  11. Ahlholm P, Sipila K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: A review. J Prosthodont 2018;27:35-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12527
  12. Gabor AG, Zaharia C, Stan AT, Gavrilovici AM, Negrutiu ML, Sinescu C. Digital Dentistry-Digital Impression and CAD/CAM system applications. J Interdisciplinary Med 2017;2:54-7. https://doi.org/10.1515/jim-2017-0033
  13. Ng J, Ruse D, Wyatt C. A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:555-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.002
  14. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry I, Thomas GW, Qian F. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthodont 2014;23:610-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12180
  15. Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:554-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.001
  16. Schaefer O, Decker M, Wittstock F, Kuepper H, Guentsch A. Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro. J Dent 2014;42:677-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.01.016
  17. Vandeweghe S, Vervack V, Dierens M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy of digital impressions of multiple dental implants: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28:648-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12853
  18. Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:362-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.018
  19. Renne W, Wolf B, Kessler R, McPherson K, Mennito AS. Evaluation of the marginal fit of CAD/CAM crowns fabricated using two different chairside CAD/CAM systems on preparations of varying quality. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015;27:194-202. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12148
  20. Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F. Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression-a split-mouth randomised clinical study. Clin Oral Investig 2019;23:4043-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-02840-0
  21. Takeuchi Y, Koizumi H, Furuchi M, Sato Y, Ohkubo C, Matsumura H. Use of digital impression systems with intraoral scanners for fabricating restorations and fixed dental prostheses. J Oral Sci 2018;60:1-7. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.17-0444
  22. Nesse H, Ulstein DM, Vaage MM, Oilo M. Internal and marginal fit of cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses fabricated with 3 different techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:686-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.05.007
  23. Dikbas I, Tanalp J, Tomruk CO, Koksal T. Evaluation of reasons for extraction of crowned teeth: a prospective study at a university clinic. Acta Odontol Scand 2013;71:848-56. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.680908
  24. 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
  25. Ucar Y, Akova T, Akyil MS, Brantley WA. Internal fit evaluation of crowns prepared using a new dental crown fabrication technique: laser-sintered Co-Cr crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:253-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60165-7
  26. Sakrana AA. In vitro evaluation of the marginal and internal discrepancies of different esthetic restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2013;21:575-80. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-775720130064
  27. Ortega R, Gonzalo E, Gomez-Polo M, Suarez MJ. Marginal and internal discrepancies of posterior zirconia-based crowns fabricated with three different CAD/CAM systems versus metal-ceramic. Int J Prosthodont 2015;28:509-11. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4359
  28. Zoellner A, Bragger U, Fellmann V, Gaengler P. Correlation between clinical scoring of secondary caries at crown margins and histologically assessed extent of the lesions. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:453-9.
  29. Keul C, Stawarczyk B, Erdelt KJ, Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Guth JF. Fit of 4-unit FDPs made of zirconia and CoCr-alloy after chairside and labside digitalization-a laboratory study. Dent Mater 2014;30:400-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.01.006
  30. Kocaagaoglu H, Kilinc HI, Albayrak H, Kara M. In vitro evaluation of marginal, axial, and occlusal discrepancies in metal ceramic restorations produced with new technologies. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:368-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.03.013
  31. Afify A, Haney S, Verrett R, Mansueto M, Cray J, Johnson R. Marginal discrepancy of noble metal-ceramic fixed dental prosthesis frameworks fabricated by conventional and digital technologies. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:307.e1-307.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.08.012
  32. Svanborg P, Skjerven H, Carlsson P, Eliasson A, Karlsson S, Ortorp A. Marginal and internal fit of cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses generated from digital and conventional impressions. Int J Dent 2014;2014:534382. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/534382
  33. Eroglu Z, Gurbulak AG. Fatigue behavior of zirconia-ceramic, galvano-ceramic, and porcelain-fused-to-metal fixed partial dentures. J Prosthodont 2013;22:516-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12059
  34. EOS. Material Data Sheet EOS CobaltChrome SP2 material for EOSINT M 270. No., 2009. (https://www.eos.info/material-m).
  35. Memarian M, Sadighpour L, Nosratpour R, Fard MJK. Marginal adaptation and internal fit of posterior 3-unit zirconia FPDs fabricated with different CAD/CAM systems. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2017;25:79-85.
  36. Dureja I, Yadav B, Malhotra P, Dabas N, Bhargava A, Pahwa R. A comparative evaluation of vertical marginal fit of provisional crowns fabricated by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technique and direct (intraoral technique) and flexural strength of the materials: An in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2018;18:314-20. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_306_17
  37. Ortorp A1, 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
  38. Boitelle P, Mawussi B, Tapie L, Fromentin O. A systematic review of CAD/CAM fit restoration evaluations. J Oral Rehabil 2014;41:853-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12205
  39. 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
  40. Kenyon BJ, Hagge MS, Leknius C, Daniels WC, Weed ST. Dimensional accuracy of 7 die materials. J Prosthodont 2005;14:25-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2005.00007.x
  41. Corso M, Abanomy A, Di Canzio J, Zurakowski D, Morgano SM. The effect of temperature changes on the dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane and polyether impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:626-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70068-X
  42. Xu D, Xiang N, Wei B. The marginal fit of selective laser melting-fabricated metal crowns: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112:1437-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.018
  43. Wankhade S, Sanghavi K, Rajguru V, Lokade J. A comparative evaluation of six commonly used types of die materials for the property of abrasion resistance, at two time intervals: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2013;3:1-6. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1067

Cited by

  1. Comparison of digital and silicone impressions for single-tooth implants and two- and three-unit implants for a free-end edentulous saddle vol.21, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01836-1