Farahnaz Nejatidanesh1, Amir Hossein Shakibamehr, Omid Savabi. 1. *Professor, Dental Materials Research Center, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. †Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. ‡Professor, Torabinejad Dental Research Center, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of marginal and internal adaptation of 2 computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and 2 conventionally made cement retained implant-supported restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An abutment and its corresponding fixture analog (Astra Tech) were inserted in left central incisor area of a maxillary cast. Four types of implant-supported single restorations were fabricated on the abutment (n = 10): e.max CAD (Cerec AC system), zirconia-based (Cercon system), IPS e.max Press, and metal-ceramic restorations. The internal and marginal gaps of the studied groups were measured by replica method and stereomicroscope. Data were subjected to 1-way ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS:Mean internal gaps of Cercon (59.48 ± 16.49 μm) and e.max Press (75.62 ± 26.92 μm) groups were significantly different from e.max CAD (120.29 ± 16.74 μm) group, but there was no significant difference between metal-ceramic restorations (89.65 ± 47.84 μm) and e.max CAD. The marginal gaps of e.max CAD (32.02 ± 10.38 μm) and Cercon restorations (34.26 ± 11.41 μm) were significantly superior from metal ceramics (59.19 ± 17.81 μm) and e.max press (74.99 ± 24.51 μm). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that although the marginal and internal gaps of the studied implant-supported restorations were in the clinically acceptable range, single crowns made with CAD/CAM technology provide better marginal fit.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of marginal and internal adaptation of 2 computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and 2 conventionally made cement retained implant-supported restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An abutment and its corresponding fixture analog (Astra Tech) were inserted in left central incisor area of a maxillary cast. Four types of implant-supported single restorations were fabricated on the abutment (n = 10): e.max CAD (Cerec AC system), zirconia-based (Cercon system), IPS e.max Press, and metal-ceramic restorations. The internal and marginal gaps of the studied groups were measured by replica method and stereomicroscope. Data were subjected to 1-way ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Mean internal gaps of Cercon (59.48 ± 16.49 μm) and e.max Press (75.62 ± 26.92 μm) groups were significantly different from e.max CAD (120.29 ± 16.74 μm) group, but there was no significant difference between metal-ceramic restorations (89.65 ± 47.84 μm) and e.max CAD. The marginal gaps of e.max CAD (32.02 ± 10.38 μm) and Cercon restorations (34.26 ± 11.41 μm) were significantly superior from metal ceramics (59.19 ± 17.81 μm) and e.max press (74.99 ± 24.51 μm). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that although the marginal and internal gaps of the studied implant-supported restorations were in the clinically acceptable range, single crowns made with CAD/CAM technology provide better marginal fit.