Abstract
Statement of problem
Advances have been made in digital dentistry for the fabrication of dental prostheses,
but evidence regarding the efficacy of digital techniques for the fabrication of intracoronal
restorations is lacking.
Purpose
The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of intracoronal
restorations fabricated with digital and conventional techniques.
Material and methods
A sound mandibular molar tooth received a standard onlay preparation, and onlays were
fabricated with 1 of 3 fabrication techniques. In group CC, the onlays were made after
conventional impression and conventional fabrication of a resin pattern. In group
CP, the onlays were made after conventional impression and 3-dimensional (3D) printing
of the pattern. In group IP, the onlays were made after intraoral scanning, and 3D
printing produced the resin pattern. Ten specimens in each group (N=30) were evaluated.
Glass-ceramic restorations were fabricated using the press technique. The replica
technique was used to assess the marginal fit. Each replica was assessed at 8 points.
One-way ANOVA was used to compare the marginal discrepancy among the 3 groups. The
Tukey honest significant differences test was applied for pairwise comparisons of
the groups (α=.05).
Results
No significant differences were noted in the marginal discrepancy at the gingival
margin among the 3 groups (P=.342), but significant differences were noted among the 3 groups in the pulpal (P=.025) and lingual (P=.031) areas. Comparison of the absolute discrepancy among the 3 groups revealed that
only groups CC and CP were significantly different (P=.020) from each other.
Conclusions
Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the conventional method yielded more
accuracy than the 3D printing method, and no differences were found between the methods
which used the 3D printer (groups CP and IP).
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic DentistryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- The application of rapid prototyping in prosthodontics.J Prosthodont. 2012; 21: 641-644
- Marginal gap, internal fit, and fracture load of leucite-reinforced ceramic inlays fabricated by CEREC inLab and hot-pressed techniques.J Prosthodont. 2011; 20: 535-540
- Three-dimensional fit of lithium disilicate partial crowns in vitro.J Dent. 2013; 41: 271-277
- Evaluation of the marginal fit of a zirconia ceramic computer-aided machined (CAM) crown system.J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 104: 216-227
- Risk management in clinical practice. Part 3. Crowns and bridges.Br Dent J. 2010; 209: 115-122
- The restorative-periodontal interface: biological parameters.Periodontol 2000. 1996; 11: 29-38
- Dental caries.Lancet. 2007; 369: 51-59
- Prevention and control of periodontal diseases in developing and industrialized nations.Periodontol. 2002; 29: 235-246
- Clinical and microbiological effects of subgingival restorations with overhanging or clinically perfect margins.J Clin Periodontol. 1983; 10: 563-578
- Effect of CNC-milling on the marginal and internal fit of dental ceramics: a pilot study.Dent Mater. 2013; 29: 851-858
- Influence of cavity preparation design on fracture resistance of posterior Leucite-reinforced ceramic restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 95: 421-429
- Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling.J Dent. 2010; 38: 553-559
- Intraoral digital impression technique: a review.J Prosthodont. 2015; 24: 313-321
- Comparative evaluation of dimension and surface detail accuracy of models produced by three different rapid prototype techniques.J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2012; 12: 16-20
- Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations.Br Dent J. 2008; 204: 505-511
- A preliminary report of designing removable partial denture frameworks using a specifically developed software package.Int J Prosthodont. 2010; 23: 370-375
- The computer-aided design and rapid prototyping fabrication of removable partial denture frameworks.Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2005; 219: 195-202
- Use of CAD/CAM technology to fabricate a removable partial denture framework.J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 96: 96-99
- A technique for fabricating patterns for removable partial denture frameworks using digitized casts and electronic surveying.J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 91: 85-88
- Prototyping for surgical and prosthetic treatment.J Craniofac Surg. 2011; 22: 914-917
- Optical impression systems for CAD-CAM restorations.J Craniofac Surg. 2012; 23: e575-e579
- Possibility of reconstruction of dental plaster cast from 3D digital study models.Biomed Eng Online. 2013; 12: 49
- Clinical outcomes of three different crown systems with CAD/CAM technology.J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112: 770-777
- Sterilization of extracted human teeth: a comparative analysis.J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2012; 2: 170-175
- Considerations for ceramic inlays in posterior teeth: a review.Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2013; 5: 21-32
- Considerations in measurement of marginal fit.J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62: 405-408
- Clinical fit of ProceraAllCeram crowns.J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 84: 419-424
- The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study.Acta Odontol Scand. 1993; 51: 201-206
- A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress, and Procera crowns.Int J Prosthodont. 1997; 10: 478-484
- Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health.J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 65: 357-364
- Internal and marginal adaptation of pressable and computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture onlay restorations.Int J Prosthodont. 2012; 25: 262-264
- Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro.J Dent. 2014; 42: 677-683
- Evaluation of different methods of optical impression making on the marginal gap of onlays created with CEREC 3D.Oper Dent. 2010; 35: 324-329
- A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods.J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112: 555-560
- Five-year clinical evaluation of In-Ceram crowns fabricated using GN-I (CAD/CAM) system.J Oral Rehabil. 2011; 38: 601-607
- A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience.Dent Mater J. 2009; 28: 44-56
- Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 109: 121-128
- Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow.Clin Oral Investig. 2013; 17: 1759-1764
- Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144: 471-478
- Marginal adaptation of different types of all-ceramic partial coverage restorations after exposure to an artificial mouth.Br Dent J. 2005; 199 (discussion 777): 779-783
- Effects of build direction on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed complete coverage interim dental restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115: 760-767
- Effects of environmental conditions, aging, and build orientations on the mechanical properties of ASTM type I specimens manufactured via stereolithography.Rapid Prototyping J. 2012; 18: 374-388
- Dimensional changes of dental impression materials by thermal changes.J Biomed Mater Res A. 2001; 58: 217-220
Article info
Publication history
Published online: June 02, 2017
Footnotes
Supported by the School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.
Identification
Copyright
© 2017 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
