Literature DB >> 25527248

Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology.

Guillermo Pradíes1, Cristina Zarauz2, Arelhys Valverde2, Alberto Ferreiroa2, Francisco Martínez-Rus2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the fit of ceramic crowns fabricated from conventional silicone impressions with the fit of ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions.
METHODS: Twenty-five participants with 30 posterior teeth with a prosthetic demand were selected for the study. Two crowns were made for each preparation. One crown was fabricated from an intraoral digital impression system (IDI group) and the other crown was fabricated from a conventional two-step silicone impression (CI group). To replicate the interface between the crown and the preparation, each crown was cemented on its corresponding clinical preparation with ultra-flow silicone. Each crown was embedded in acrylic resin to stabilise the registered interface and then cut in 2mm thick slices in a buco-lingual orientation. The internal gap was determined as the vertical distance from the internal surface of the crown to the prepared tooth surface at four points (marginal gap, axial gap, crest gap, and occlusal fossa gap) using stereomicroscopy with a magnification of 40×. Data was analysed by using Wilcoxon signed rank test (α=0.05).
RESULTS: Internal adaptation values were significantly affected by the impression technique (p=0.001). Mean marginal gap was 76.33 ± 65.32 μm for the crowns of the IDI group and 91.46 ± 72.17 μm for the CI group.
CONCLUSION: All-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions with wavefront sampling technology demonstrated better internal fit than crowns manufactured from silicone impressions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Impressions obtained from an intraoral digital scanner based on wavefront sampling technology can be used for manufacturing ceramic crowns in the normal clinical practice with better results than conventional impressions with elastomers.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  All-ceramic systems; CAD/CAM; Internal gap; Intraoral scanner; Marginal gap; Zirconia

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25527248     DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.12.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dent        ISSN: 0300-5712            Impact factor:   4.379


  21 in total

1.  Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns.

Authors:  S Berrendero; M P Salido; A Valverde; A Ferreiroa; G Pradíes
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-01-23       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Impression Techniques Used for Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Authors:  Michael S McCracken; David R Louis; Mark S Litaker; Helena M Minyé; Thomas Oates; Valeria V Gordan; Don G Marshall; Cyril Meyerowitz; Gregg H Gilbert
Journal:  J Prosthodont       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 2.752

3.  Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study.

Authors:  Matthias Rödiger; Arthur Heinitz; Ralf Bürgers; Sven Rinke
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Impression evaluation and laboratory use for single-unit crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Authors:  Michael S McCracken; Mark S Litaker; Ashley J George; Scott Durand; Sepideh Malekpour; Don G Marshall; Cyril Meyerowitz; Lauren Carter; Valeria V Gordan; Gregg H Gilbert
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 3.634

5.  Accuracy of commercial intraoral scanners.

Authors:  Mattia Sacher; Georg Schulz; Hans Deyhle; Kurt Jäger; Bert Müller
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-05-24

6.  Validity of Intraoral Scans Compared with Plaster Models: An In-Vivo Comparison of Dental Measurements and 3D Surface Analysis.

Authors:  Fan Zhang; Kyung-Jin Suh; Kyung-Min Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature.

Authors:  Francesco Mangano; Andrea Gandolfi; Giuseppe Luongo; Silvia Logozzo
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2017-12-12       Impact factor: 2.757

8.  Evaluation of marginal and internal gap of three-unit metal framework according to subtractive manufacturing and additive manufacturing of CAD/CAM systems.

Authors:  Dong-Yeon Kim; Eo-Bin Kim; Hae-Young Kim; Ji-Hwan Kim; Woong-Chul Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 1.904

9.  The Prosthetic Workflow in the Digital Era.

Authors:  Lidia Tordiglione; Michele De Franco; Giovanni Bosetti
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2016-10-18

10.  Trueness and Precision of Four Intraoral Scanners in Oral Implantology: A Comparative in Vitro Study.

Authors:  Francesco G Mangano; Giovanni Veronesi; Uli Hauschild; Eitan Mijiritsky; Carlo Mangano
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.