ABSTRACT
Manufacturing of Fränkel's functional regulator 3 (FR3) is complicated and requires extensive knowledge from the dental technician. To determine whether FR3s produced by CAD/CAM techniques (CAD-FR3) meet similar mechanical properties like conventional FR3s (Con-FR3), for each of 10 patient cases, three CAD-FR3 designs (palatal connector cross-section 3 × 3 mm, 4 × 1 mm or 5 × 2 mm) and one Con-FR3 were subjected to cyclic loading and subsequent fracture testing in a universal testing device. Transversal load capacity (Fmax(FR3)) and stiffness were compared among the different CAD-FR3 designs and Con-FR3s using Friedman and Wilcoxon tests with a significance level of α = 0.05. All CAD-FR3 designs had significantly higher mean Fmax(FR3) (p ≤ 0.007) and stiffness (p ≤ 0.005) than the Con-FR3s. The CAD-FR33×3 had the highest mean Fmax(FR3) (98.2 ± 26.2 N) and stiffness (37.1 ± 15.5 N/mm), closely followed by the CAD-FR35×2 (Fmax(FR3): 90.3 ± 24.7 N; stiffness: 30.0 ± 12.3 N/mm). Among the CAD appliances, CAD-FR34×1 had the lowest values (p ≤ 0.007 for all pairwise tests) with Fmax(FR3) of 45.8 ± 17.9 N and stiffness of 12.5 ± 7.3 N/mm. CAD-FR3s have superior mechanical properties in comparison to Con-FR3s if certain design parameters are followed. Further clinical investigations have to examine if they can serve as an alternative in practice.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the dimensional accuracy of impressions made using a new fast-setting polyether material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A metallic reference model with two crown preparations, one inlay preparation, and three stainless steel precision balls was digitized to create a digital reference model. Sixteen one-step impressions were made for each of the four study groups, differing in impression material (regular-setting polyether [RSP] vs fast-setting polyether [FSP]) and technique (monophase vs dualphase), for a total of 64 specimens. Plaster casts fabricated from these impressions were digitized using 3D scans. Global accuracy was studied by evaluating distance and angle deviations between the replica and the reference model. Local accuracy was described in terms of trueness and precision of the aligned individual abutment tooth surfaces. RESULTS: For all impression materials and techniques, the local accuracy at the abutment tooth level was excellent. For surfaces prepared for crowns, mean trueness was < 10 µm, and mean precision < 12 µm. Inlay surfaces were associated with higher inaccuracies (mean trueness < 21 µm and mean precision < 37 µm). The greatest global inaccuracies were generally measured for the cross-arch span, with mean distance changes between -55 µm and -94 µm. For all aspects of studied accuracy, impressions with FSP were at least comparable to those fabricated with RSP. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, all tested polyether materials would allow for clinically acceptable impression making. The new fast-setting material could be an alternative to regular-setting polyether materials, especially for single crowns and small fixed partial dentures.
Subject(s)
Dental Impression Technique , Models, Dental , Crowns , Dental Impression Materials , InlaysABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the resistance to fracture in cantilevered fixed dental prostheses (cFDPs) of single implant-supported zirconia cantilevers in the anterior region. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two cemented and solely screw-retained cFDPs consisting of an implant-supported crown replacing the central incisor and an attached cantilever unit in the position of the lateral incisor in the maxilla were constructed by computer-aided design (CAD) and machined by computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). For the cemented solution, a cFDP was designed on top of a customized abutment luted to an adhesive base. For screw-retained cFDPs, abutment, cement gap, and restoration of the cementable design were combined. All cFDPs were veneered manually on the facial side. Half of the samples underwent artificial aging (thermocycling and chewing simulation) before fracture tests were conducted with loads applied to the pontic either parallel to the implant axis (axial loading on the pontic) or tilted lingually by α = 45 degrees (oblique loading on the pontic). Thus, there were eight groups differing in cFDP design, artificial aging, and load application (n = 8/group). If fracture (Fu,total) occurred within the implant components, the adhesive base was replaced by a cast CoCr base, and the cFDP's fracture resistance (Fu,cFDP) was also determined. Using statistical analyses (SPSS 24, IBM), factors affecting fracture resistance were identified. RESULTS: Fu,total was mainly correlated to screw fractures and therefore not affected by cFDP design. Oblique loading on the pontic (Fu,total = 231 N - 352 N), however, led to a significant (P < .001) decrease in ultimate load compared with axial loading on the pontic (Fu,total = 611 N - 815 N). In relation to Fu,total, Fu,cFDP was approximately twice as high for both loading conditions. CONCLUSION: When relating the results to maximum occlusal forces exerted in the maxillary anterior region, single implant-supported cFDPs can be a viable restorative treatment option.
