ABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of the present study was to compare the marginal gap of teeth restored with crowns using six different CAD/CAM materials with two different milling units. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten mandibular molar teeth were collected after surgical extractions and prepared with two different diamond-coated instruments to receive full veneer crowns. The teeth were optically scanned, designed in CAD/CAM software, and milled in two different milling units. The marginal gap was measured using an optical microscope at 200x magnification. The restricted maximum likelihood (REML) method was used to estimate unknown parameters, and the statistical calculation was performed using R software. RESULTS: The model used to answer the primary study question involved a significant (P < 0.001) instrument versus material interaction. No other interaction was statistically significant (P = 0.146). Finally, significant within-crown heteroscedasticity was found (P < 0.001) for the two different diamond-coated instruments and was taken into account in the model used. CONCLUSIONS: The marginal gaps achieved by the crowns across all groups were within a clinically acceptable range.
Subject(s)
Dental Marginal Adaptation , Dental Prosthesis Design , Computer-Aided Design , Crowns , Dental Porcelain , Humans , MolarABSTRACT
This study aimed to compare the vertical marginal gap of teeth restored with lithium disilicate crowns fabricated using CAD/CAM or by pressed ceramic approach. Twenty mandibular third molar teeth were collected after surgical extractions and prepared to receive full veneer crowns. Teeth were optically scanned and lithium disilicate blocks were used to fabricate crowns using CAD/CAM technique. Polyvinyl siloxane impressions of the prepared teeth were made and monolithic pressed lithium disilicate crowns were fabricated. The marginal gap was measured using optical microscope at 200× magnification (Keyence VHX-5000, Japan). Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon test. The lithium disilicate pressed crowns had significantly smaller (p = 0.006) marginal gaps (38 ± 12 µm) than the lithium disilicate CAD/CAM crowns (45 ± 12 µm). This research indicates that lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with the press technique have measurably smaller marginal gaps compared with those fabricated with CAD/CAM technique within in vitro environments. The marginal gaps achieved by the crowns across all groups were within a clinically acceptable range.
Subject(s)
Computer-Aided Design , Crowns/standards , Dental Impression Technique , Dental Marginal Adaptation/standards , Dental Porcelain/chemistry , Dental Impression Materials , Dental Prosthesis Design , Humans , Materials Testing , Reference Standards , Reference Values , Reproducibility of Results , Statistics, NonparametricABSTRACT
Abstract: This study aimed to compare the vertical marginal gap of teeth restored with lithium disilicate crowns fabricated using CAD/CAM or by pressed ceramic approach. Twenty mandibular third molar teeth were collected after surgical extractions and prepared to receive full veneer crowns. Teeth were optically scanned and lithium disilicate blocks were used to fabricate crowns using CAD/CAM technique. Polyvinyl siloxane impressions of the prepared teeth were made and monolithic pressed lithium disilicate crowns were fabricated. The marginal gap was measured using optical microscope at 200× magnification (Keyence VHX-5000, Japan). Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon test. The lithium disilicate pressed crowns had significantly smaller (p = 0.006) marginal gaps (38 ± 12 μm) than the lithium disilicate CAD/CAM crowns (45 ± 12 μm). This research indicates that lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with the press technique have measurably smaller marginal gaps compared with those fabricated with CAD/CAM technique within in vitro environments. The marginal gaps achieved by the crowns across all groups were within a clinically acceptable range.
