Analysis of the marginal adaptation of different crowns fabricated with computer-aided technology using an intraoral digital scanner

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation of ceramic and composite resin crowns fabricated with computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology using an intraoral digital scanner. Methods: A human mandibular right second molar was prepared for a ceramic crown. The impressions were made using intraoral scanning device and crowns were milled. Tem crowns were fabricated for each group (n=10): GF ­ Feldspathic Ceramic (Cerec Blocs, Sirona), GL - Lithium Disilicate Ceramic (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar), GG - composite resin (Grandio Blocs, VOCO) and GB - composite resin (Brava Block, FGM). The marginal gap was measured for each specimen at 4 points under magnification with a stereomicroscope. All data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey's test (α=.05). Results: The lowest marginal discrepancy value was observed in GB (60.95 ± 13.64 µm), which was statistically different from the GL (84.22 ± 20.86 µm). However, there was no statistically significant difference between these groups when compared with the other groups, GF (73.26 ±8.19 µm) and GG (68.42 ± 11.31 µm). Conclusion: It can be concluded that the composite resin presented the lowest variance compared to the lithium disilicate glass ceramic, although the marginal gap of all materials tested was within the acceptable clinical limit (120 µm)

Marginal adaptation of provisional crowns made of acrylic and bisacrylic resins using different impression materials

Aim: To evaluate the marginal adaptation of provisional crowns made of acrylic and bisacrylic resins using different impression materials. Methods: a metal die and a matrix applied through a direct technique were used to fabricate the specimens. The impression materials used as a matrix were divided into four groups: Irreversible hydrocolloid(IH), laboratory silicone (LS), condensation silicone (CS), and addition silicone (AS). After the impression procedures, each matrix was loaded with the provisional prosthetic materials, Alike, Duralay, Protemp 4, and Structur 3 (n = 12). Marginal discrepancy was evaluated using a stereomicroscope at ×45 magnification. The images obtained were transferred to the Corel Draw X7 program, and the distances from the cervical margins of the specimen to the reference lines at the metal die were measured vertically. The data were analyzed by using 2-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey test (α=.05). Results: the acrylic resins had higher values ​​of marginal discrepancy compared to the bisacrylic resins. A statistically significant difference was found between all impression materials, and the irreversible hydrocolloid presented higher values of discrepancy (303.28­613.31 µm), whereas addition silicone had the lowest (48.61­190.06 µm). Conclusions: the bisacrylic resins had a better marginal adaptation compared to the acrylic resins. The addition silicone promoted a better marginal adaptation of the provisional prosthetic materials tested, followed by condensation silicone, laboratory silicone, and irreversible hydrocolloid