Evaluation of the fit of zirconia copings fabricated by direct and indirect digital scanning procedures

Lee, Bora; Oh, Kyung Chul; Haam, Daewon; Lee, Joon‐Hee; Moon, Hi-Soo

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.08.003

Cited by 25 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The present values of marginal and internal gaps were in disagreement to those reported by Lee et al (2018) (37) , who evaluated the accuracy of fit of zirconia copings and reported much lower gap values. This may be due to the difference in cement spaces used in their study.…”

Section: Marginal and Internal Fitcontrasting

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Fracture Resistance and Fit Accuracy of Three Types of Cad/Cam Fabricated Crowns Using Cone Beam Computerized Tomography

Moaty

Azer

2018

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The aim of this study was to evaluate the internal and marginal fit accuracy using cone beam computerized tomography as an innovative nondestructive method and to assess the fracture resistance of the recently introduced zirconia reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic in comparison to lithium disilicate and monolithic zirconia. Materials and Methods:Three types of CAD/ CAM ceramic blocks were used; zirconia reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramics (Vita Suprinity), lithium disilicate glass ceramic (IPS e.max CAD) and partially sintered translucent zirconia (In-Coris TZI). A ceramic master die was fabricated and scanned using the Cerec Omnicam to produce a total number of 30 crowns, which were divided into 3 groups (n = 10) according to the ceramic material used . Group I: Vita Suprinity. Group II: IPS e.max CAD and Group III: In-Coris TZI. A highly computerized cone beam tomography (CBCT) was used to evaluate the fit accuracy of the crowns on the master die. For fracture resistance test, epoxy resin dies were optically scanned using Omnicam scanner and 30 crowns were fabricated using the CAD/ CAM ceramic materials (n = 10) for each tested material. The crowns were cemented using self-adhesive resin cement. A compressive load was applied at a cross head speed of 1mm/min and the fracture load in Newtons was recorded for each specimen. Fractured crowns were examined to determine the mode of fracture. Results:Marginal and internal fit evaluation showed that group I (Vita Suprinity) recorded the least mean in respect to all measuring points (103.6±10.4µm), while group III (In Coris TZI) showed the highest mean in respect to all points (146.7±9.23µm). For fracture resistance, In Coris TZI zirconia showed the highest fracture load (4548.9±200.9 N), while the lowest mean value was recorded in Vita Suprinity (3484.8±22.17 N). There was no significant difference between Vita Suprinity and IPS e.max CAD.Conclusion: Vita Suprinity crowns showed the best marginal and internal fit when compared to the other two materials. In-Coris TZI exhibited the highest fracture strength of all three groups. All values were within a clinically acceptable range for the three ceramic materials tested. (1572)

show abstract

Section: Marginal and Internal Fitcontrasting

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Fracture Resistance and Fit Accuracy of Three Types of Cad/Cam Fabricated Crowns Using Cone Beam Computerized Tomography

Moaty

Azer

2018

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In another in vivo study, Seelbach et al reported no significant differences in the marginal fit of 3 types of crowns: LAVA, zirconia, and lithium disilicate crowns. Similar marginal discrepancies were also reported for metal and zirconia copings fabricated using direct scanning, impression scanning, or lost‐wax techniques …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…Lithium disilicate ceramic is a glass‐ceramic with improved strength. Similar to reports on zirconia, reports on the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns made from conventional and CAD/CAM techniques were not consistent …”

mentioning

confidence: 57%

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fit of Metal, Zirconia, and Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Different Manufacturing Techniques

Hamad

Quran

AlJalam

et al. 2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:To evaluate the accuracy of fit of metal, lithium disilicate, and zirconia crowns, which were produced using different manufacturing techniques. Materials and Methods: Ten patients in need of a molar crown were recruited. Eight crowns were fabricated for each patient: 2 zirconia, 3 lithium disilicate (e.max), and 3 metal-ceramic crowns using conventional, conventional/digital, and digital techniques. Marginal, axial, and occlusal gaps were measured using a replica technique. Replicas were sectioned mesiodistally and buccolingually and were observed under a stereomicroscope. A total of 32 measurements for each crown replica at 3 different points (12 marginal, 12 axial, and 8 occlusal) were performed. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests. Results: Marginal means ranged from 116.39 ± 32.76 µm for the conventional metal-ceramic group to 147.56 ± 31.56 µm for the digital e.max group. The smallest axial gap was recorded for the digital zirconia group (76.19 ± 23.94 µm), while the largest axial gap was recorded for the conventional e.max (101.80 ± 19.81 µm) and conventional/digital metal-ceramic groups (101.80 ± 35.31 µm). The conventional e.max crowns had the smallest occlusal mean gap (185.59 ± 59.09 µm), while the digital e.max group had the largest occlusal mean gap (295.38 ± 67.80 µm). Type of crown had no significant effect on marginal (p = 0.07, f = 2.71), axial (p = 0.75, f = 0.29), or occlusal fit (p = 0.099, f = 2.4), while fabrication method had a significant effect on axial gap only (p = 0.169, f = 1.82, p = 0.003, f = 6.21, and p = 0.144, f = 2 for marginal, axial, and occlusal fit, respectively). Digital fabrication produced significantly smaller axial gaps than the conventional method (p = 0.02), and the conventional digital method (p = 0.005). Conclusions:The type of crown and method of manufacturing had no effect on the marginal and occlusal gap of single posterior crown, while the method of manufacturing had a significant effect on the axial gap. The digital method produced the smallest axial fit in comparison with the other methods, while the type of crown had no effect on the axial gap.

show abstract

“…For the MD, the results of the present study were in agreement with those of Ueda et al (19 μm) for milled CoCr four‐unit FPD fabricated from a digital impression. Lee et al found comparable results for zirconia single crowns (18 μm) scanned with Trios (3Shape, Denmark) and (23 μm) for the scanned impression. Jeon et al concluded that using a 3‐D analysis to compare scanning impression is a highly accurate method on tapered teeth, but less accurate on parallel sided walls.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been reported that IOS are more accurate and efficient in short‐span restorations, while conventional impressions are more beneficial for full‐arch restorations . Nevertheless, other studies have not found any significant difference and consider marginal discrepancies (MD) <120 μm as clinically acceptable . There is still a lack of information in Computer Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacturing dentistry regarding the horizontal misfit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the fit of zirconia three‐unit fixed partial dentures fabricated by different impression techniques

Moustapha

Azzam

AlShwaimi

et al. 2019

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of the present study was to evaluate the marginal and internal fit of zirconium fixed partial denture using different impression techniques. Methods A Nissin Typodont model, including maxillary central incisor and canine with missing lateral incisor, was selected for the present study. Thirty zirconium frameworks were fabricated following three impression techniques (N = 10), conventional silicone impression (group C), scanned dental impression (group S), and Trios 3 (3Shape) intraoral scanner (group T). An extra‐fine milling strategy was applied. Results Group T had the smallest discrepancy compared to groups C (P = 0.006) and S (P = 0.052) at the marginal level, whereas it was larger at the incisal tip. Discrepancies in group T were smaller than group C (P = 0.004) when measured at the axial walls, and smaller than group S (P = 0.045) when measured at the chamfer area for the central teeth only. Samples in group T showed a greater percentage of equally extended restorations (52.5%), while other groups were mainly underextended (group C: 63.7%, group S: 68.8%). Conclusion Better adaptation was achieved with the intraoral scanner group, except at the incisal tip. Conventional and scanned impressions revealed a greater percentage of underextended restorations.

show abstract

Evaluation of the fit of zirconia copings fabricated by direct and indirect digital scanning procedures

Cited by 25 publications

References 53 publications

Evaluation of Fracture Resistance and Fit Accuracy of Three Types of Cad/Cam Fabricated Crowns Using Cone Beam Computerized Tomography

Evaluation of Fracture Resistance and Fit Accuracy of Three Types of Cad/Cam Fabricated Crowns Using Cone Beam Computerized Tomography

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fit of Metal, Zirconia, and Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Different Manufacturing Techniques

Evaluation of the fit of zirconia three‐unit fixed partial dentures fabricated by different impression techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About