Marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic CADCAM single crown restorations

Date
2013
DOI
Authors
Posada Orozco, Manuel Salvador
Version
OA Version
Citation
Abstract
Objective: The objective is to evaluate marginal and internal fit of different single crown all­ ceramic restorations manufactured by different CAD/CAM systems. Methods: Ten ivorine teeth (four molars, three premolars, three anteriors) were prepared for a full ceramic crown restoration with chamfer margins and six degree convergence. Six Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impressions were made of each prepared model resulting in six sets of ten replica dies made in stone. The dies were used to produce and test four types of milled zirconia and two types of lithium disilicate restorations: Group 1: KATANA (Noritake, Japan) copings scanned with KATANA Scanner SC-3 (Noritake, Japan) and milled by DWX-50N (Noritake, Japan); Group 2: Aadva-Zr (GC, California, USA) copings scanned with GC Aadva Scan (GC , California, USA) milled by GMlO00 (GC, California, USA) ; Group 3: In-Ceram Zirconia (VITA, Bad Sackingen, Germany) copings scanned with inEos red (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) and milled by Cerec-inLab (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany); Group 4: Lava (3M ESPE, USA) copings scanned with Lava Scan ST Scanner (3M ESPE, USA) milled by CNC 240 (3M ESPE, USA); Group 5: IPS e.max CAD (lvoclar Vivadent, USA) copings scanned with CEREC-3 (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) and milled by CEREC-inLab (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany); Group 6: IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent, USA) copings scanned with E4D (D4D, Texas, USA) and milled by E4D MILL (D4D, Texas, USA). All restorations were seated on their respective ivorine teeth and clamped with uniform force. Eight measurements of marginal fit per restoration were performed at pre-established points using an optical microscope (Zeiss) with electronic micrometer at 500X. Each restoration was subsequently cemented on the corresponding die (RelyX[TM] Unicem -3M ESPE) under 50N of static force. Cemented specimens were embedded in epoxy resin and sectioned bucco-lingually and mesio-distally. Ten measurements of internal fit were performed per section. Results: The mean marginal gap for Group 1 was 13.l[mu]m (±3.6[mu]m). Group 2 had a mean of 20. l [mu]m (±6.8[mu]m). Group 3 had a mean of 35.2[mu]m (±7.2[mu]m). Group 4 had a mean of 41.7[mu]m (±6.7[mu]m). Group 5 had a mean of 80.4[mu]m (±18.3[mu]m). Group 6 had a mean of 113.9[mu]m (±35.5[mu]m). The mean internal space for Group 1 was 35.3[mu]m (±7.5[mu]m). Group 2 had a mean of 46.4[mu]m (±6.0[mu]m). Group 3 had a mean of 98.l[mu]m (±11.7[mu]m). Group 4 had a mean of 88.9[mu]m (±13.9[mu]m). Group 5 had a mean of 146. l [mu]m (±25.4[mu]m). Group 6 had a mean of 165.3[mu]m (±23.8[mu]m). One way ANOVA (at a= 0.05) and Tukey test were used to analyze the data. Conclusion: A significant difference was found between the groups for both marginal and internal fit (P[less than]0.0001). Groups 1 and 2 had significantly better marginal and internal fit than the other groups; Groups 2 and 3 had significantly better marginal and internal fit than Groups 5 and 6; Group 5 had significantly better marginal fit than Group 6, but there was no significant difference in the internal fit when compared to Group 6. There was a significant difference when internal and marginal fit were compared within the groups.
Description
PLEASE NOTE: This work is protected by copyright. Downloading is restricted to the BU community: please click Download and log in with a valid BU account to access. If you are the author of this work and would like to make it publicly available, please contact open-help@bu.edu.
Thesis (MSD) --Boston University, Goldman School of Dental Medicine, 2013 (Department of Restorative Sciences and Biomaterials).
Includes bibliography: leaves 75-80.
License
This work is protected by copyright. Downloading is restricted to the BU community. If you are the author of this work and would like to make it publicly available, please contact open-help@bu.edu.