Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: a systematic review

Abstract

CAD/CAM, post-sintered milling, straight configuration and shorter span frameworks provided superior results than CAM, pre-sintered milling, curved configuration and longer span frameworks. Veneering zirconia frameworks caused deterioration in fit, while ageing of zirconia had no implications on the fit. Further studies are needed to determine the clinical significance of the differences in the accuracy reported in this review.

Microfractures in metal-ceramic and all-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses caused by superstructure fixation

“…The choice of zirconia material in this study, i.e., HIP zirconia ceramic versus presintered zirconia ceramic, had no effect on strain development in the all-ceramic frameworks. This result contradicted a study conducted by Kohorst et al 25) and a review published by Abduo et al 2) , which claimed that restorations made from fully sintered zirconia showed better fitting accuracy.…”

“…It has been pointed out that superstructures fabricated by conventional methods such as casting failed to achieve a passive fit [2][3][4] . When multi-unit fixed restorations were fabricated using the computer-aided design/computeraided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technique, greater accuracy was achieved [5][6][7][8][9] .…”

Multifactorial analysis of the impact of different manufacturing processes on the marginal fit of zirconia copings

“…Clinically, the fi t of all-ceramic restorations is infl uenced by factors that simulate oral conditions, such as the veneering technique, cementation methodology, and aging process, which have not been evaluated in the present study 33) . Furthermore, the preparations of the artifi cial abutments were idealized and thus do not refl ect the conditions of daily clinical practice 14) .…”

Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners

“…20,21 For CAD/CAM fabricated crowns, the approximate acceptable marginal gap is less than 90 mm. [22][23][24] The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal gap discrepancy of lithium disilicate single crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using both conventional and 2 digital impression techniques.…”