Literature DB >> 30515576

Tooth substance removal for ceramic single crown materials-an in vitro comparison.

Franz Sebastian Schwindling1, Moritz Waldecker2, Peter Rammelsberg2, Stefan Rues2, Wolfgang Bömicke2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the tooth structure removal required for currently available ceramic crown materials.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety typodont teeth (60 incisors, 30 molars) were assigned to nine study groups. The teeth were digitized, weighed with a high-precision balance, and fixed in carriers in identical alignment. Full-crown restorations were prepared according to material-specific guidelines for monolithic zirconia (MZ), polymer-infiltrated ceramics (PIC), buccally veneered zirconia (BVZ), feldspathic ceramics (FC), fully veneered zirconia (FVZ), and lithium disilicate (LD). Tooth structure removal was assessed by weighing the teeth before and after preparation. Coronal volume loss was analyzed statistically by use of one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey HSD tests with α = 0.05.
RESULTS: Mean tooth structure removal for incisors was 42% (SD 2%) for MZ, 46% (SD 1%) for PIC, 50% (SD 2%) for BVZ, 57% (SD 1%) for FC, 57% (SD 2%) for FVZ, and 59% (SD 2%) for LD. Mean tooth structure removal for molars was 21% (SD 2%) for MZ, 31% (SD 1%) for PIC, and 35% (SD 1%) for LD. Inter-group differences were statistically significant, except for between FC and FVZ.
CONCLUSIONS: Preparation of full ceramic crowns for restoration-free teeth is an invasive procedure. Selecting the ceramic material can, however, reduce loss of tooth structure substantially. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Monolithic zirconia is the least invasive material for the preparation of incisor and molar ceramic single crowns. Prescribing buccally veneered instead of fully veneered zirconia reduces preparation invasiveness significantly.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ceramic crowns; Minimally invasive procedures; Preparation design; Tooth substance removal

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30515576     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2753-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  27 in total

1.  Composite resin restoration and postoperative sensitivity: clinical follow-up in an undergraduate program.

Authors:  M Unemori; Y Matsuya; A Akashi; Y Goto; A Akamine
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Factors influencing pulpal response to cavity restorations.

Authors:  J Camps; J Déjou; M Rémusat; I About
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.304

3.  Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for posterior teeth.

Authors:  Daniel Edelhoff; John A Sorensen
Journal:  Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for anterior teeth.

Authors:  Daniel Edelhoff; John A Sorensen
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 3.426

5.  Influence of preparation form, luting space setting and cement type on the marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM crown copings.

Authors:  R Hmaidouch; P Neumann; W-D Mueller
Journal:  Int J Comput Dent       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.883

6.  Clinical results of lithium-disilicate crowns after up to 9 years of service.

Authors:  Maren Gehrt; Stefan Wolfart; Nicole Rafai; Sven Reich; Daniel Edelhoff
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  In vitro study investigating the mass of tooth structure removed following endodontic and restorative procedures.

Authors:  Sela K F Hussain; Ailbhe McDonald; David R Moles
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.426

8.  Volumetric measurements of removed tooth structure associated with various preparation designs.

Authors:  Afnan F Al-Fouzan; Esam A Tashkandi
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.681

9.  Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow.

Authors:  Paul Seelbach; Cora Brueckel; Bernd Wöstmann
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-10-21       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods.

Authors:  Jonathan Ng; Dorin Ruse; Chris Wyatt
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 3.426

View more
  3 in total

1.  Influence of intraoral scanning on the quality of preparations for all-ceramic single crowns.

Authors:  Oliver Schubert; Kurt-Jürgen Erdelt; Roland Tittenhofer; Jan Hajtó; Alexander Bergmann; Jan-Frederik Güth
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 2.  Overview of Several Typical Ceramic Materials for Restorative Dentistry.

Authors:  Hao Yu Shi; Runxuan Pang; Jing Yang; Di Fan; HongXin Cai; Heng Bo Jiang; Jianmin Han; Eui-Seok Lee; Yunhan Sun
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 3.246

3.  Two-body wear of occlusal splint materials from subtractive computer-aided manufacturing and three-dimensional printing.

Authors:  Felix Schmeiser; Uwe Baumert; Bogna Stawarczyk
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 3.606

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.