Effect of digital impressions and production protocols on the adaptation of zirconia copings

Kocaağaoğlu, Hasan; Kılınç, Halil İbrahim; Albayrak, Haydar

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.06.004

Cited by 31 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this was different from other reports, which documented the superiority of the conventional technique for the fit of single crowns for lithium disilicate, and metal, or the superiority of the digital technique for lithium disilicate, and metal crowns . This was also different from the studies that reported better marginal fit for single zirconia crowns produced by the digital technique compared to the cast digitization technique . The differences with these studies could be explained by the wide variations in measurement methods, specimen design, sample size, and tooth selection.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fit of Metal, Zirconia, and Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Different Manufacturing Techniques

Hamad

Quran

AlJalam

et al. 2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:To evaluate the accuracy of fit of metal, lithium disilicate, and zirconia crowns, which were produced using different manufacturing techniques. Materials and Methods: Ten patients in need of a molar crown were recruited. Eight crowns were fabricated for each patient: 2 zirconia, 3 lithium disilicate (e.max), and 3 metal-ceramic crowns using conventional, conventional/digital, and digital techniques. Marginal, axial, and occlusal gaps were measured using a replica technique. Replicas were sectioned mesiodistally and buccolingually and were observed under a stereomicroscope. A total of 32 measurements for each crown replica at 3 different points (12 marginal, 12 axial, and 8 occlusal) were performed. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests. Results: Marginal means ranged from 116.39 ± 32.76 µm for the conventional metal-ceramic group to 147.56 ± 31.56 µm for the digital e.max group. The smallest axial gap was recorded for the digital zirconia group (76.19 ± 23.94 µm), while the largest axial gap was recorded for the conventional e.max (101.80 ± 19.81 µm) and conventional/digital metal-ceramic groups (101.80 ± 35.31 µm). The conventional e.max crowns had the smallest occlusal mean gap (185.59 ± 59.09 µm), while the digital e.max group had the largest occlusal mean gap (295.38 ± 67.80 µm). Type of crown had no significant effect on marginal (p = 0.07, f = 2.71), axial (p = 0.75, f = 0.29), or occlusal fit (p = 0.099, f = 2.4), while fabrication method had a significant effect on axial gap only (p = 0.169, f = 1.82, p = 0.003, f = 6.21, and p = 0.144, f = 2 for marginal, axial, and occlusal fit, respectively). Digital fabrication produced significantly smaller axial gaps than the conventional method (p = 0.02), and the conventional digital method (p = 0.005). Conclusions:The type of crown and method of manufacturing had no effect on the marginal and occlusal gap of single posterior crown, while the method of manufacturing had a significant effect on the axial gap. The digital method produced the smallest axial fit in comparison with the other methods, while the type of crown had no effect on the axial gap.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Zirconia is a high‐strength material, and its use has increased rapidly with the evolution of CAD/CAM technology . Regarding the marginal fit of zirconia restorations, conflicting reports have also been documented . Lithium disilicate ceramic is a glass‐ceramic with improved strength.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fit of Metal, Zirconia, and Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Different Manufacturing Techniques

Hamad

Quran

AlJalam

et al. 2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9,[12][13][14] The internal discrepancy has been reported to be larger in occlusal than in axial areas, 15 and an occlusal gap of 100 to 200 mm is considered an acceptable range. [16][17][18] Impression accuracy is essential for a well-fitting restoration. 19 In conventional techniques, elastomers (such as polyether or polyvinyl siloxane) are used to make impressions of prepared teeth.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although these materials have adequate precision and stability, 20,21 conventional impressions have drawbacks such as the existence of voids or debris in important areas, 19 polymerization issues, exposure of the less accurate heavy-body material through the wash material, and inadequate mixing of the materials. 16,22 In addition, making conventional impressions can be uncomfortable for patients because of the gag reflex. 16,23 Certain laboratory procedures can also affect the marginal fit of restorations, 24 including the production of stone definitive casts, [25][26][27] die hardener and spacer application, and restoration waxing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16,22 In addition, making conventional impressions can be uncomfortable for patients because of the gag reflex. 16,23 Certain laboratory procedures can also affect the marginal fit of restorations, 24 including the production of stone definitive casts, [25][26][27] die hardener and spacer application, and restoration waxing. 28,29 The fabrication process of dental restorations has changed since the introduction of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit zirconia frameworks fabricated with CAD-CAM technology using direct and indirect digital scans

Arezoobakhsh

Shayegh

Ghomi

et al. 2020

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statement of problem. Accurate marginal and internal fit of dental restorations are essential for their long-term success. The fit of zirconia restorations prepared using digital scan systems has not been fully evaluated.Purpose. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the marginal and internal fit of 3-unit zirconia frameworks fabricated using direct and indirect digital scans.Material and methods. In a maxillary model, the left first premolar and first molar were prepared to receive 3-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses. Conventional impressions were made using stock trays and 2-step putty/wash polyvinyl siloxane material and were scanned using laboratory scanner (Conventional Impression-Laboratory scanner [CIL] group). The impressions were then poured, and the stone casts were scanned (Dental Cast-Laboratory scanner [DCL] group). Digital scans were made using TRIOS (TRIOS Intraoral scanner [TRI] group) and CS3600 (CS3600 Intraoral scanner [CSI] group) scanners (n=10). Zirconia copings were designed and milled from presintered blocks and subsequently sintered. Marginal, mid-axial, axio-occlusal, and mid-occlusal discrepancies were measured using the silicone replica technique with stereomicroscopy at ×50 magnification. The data were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA (a=.01).Results. The ANOVA revealed significant differences among the studied groups in terms of all studied characteristics (P.01). Marginal gap was significantly higher in the DCL group (106 ±45 mm) compared with all other groups (P.01). However, no significant differences were observed in marginal gap between the TRI (60 ±15 mm) and CSI (55 ±13 mm) groups (P>.01). Internal gap in the mid-occlusal and axio-occlusal regions were significantly higher in the CIL (238 ±92 mm and 227 ±95 mm) and DCL (248 ±71 mm and 216 ±68 mm) groups than those recorded in the TRI (104 ±27 mm and 126 ±31 mm) and CSI (128 ±16 mm and 147 ±28 mm) groups (P.01). Internal discrepancies in the mid-axial position were similar between the TRI (70 ±15 mm) and CSI (72 ±23 mm) groups (P>.01), but these values were significantly lower than those recorded in the CIL (88 ±31 mm) and DCL (85 ±30 mm) groups (P.01). Conclusions.Within the limitations of this study, zirconia frameworks in the TRI and CSI groups had lower marginal and internal gaps compared with those in the DCL and CIL groups. Marginal gap in all groups was within a clinically acceptable range. (J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:105-12)

show abstract

Fit of tooth‐supported zirconia single crowns—A systematic review of the literature

Ahmed

Shariati

Gazzaz

et al. 2020

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to systematically map all the factors that influence the fit and adaptation of zirconia crowns and/or copings. Materials and methods The investigational strategy involved carrying out an electronic search between December 1, 2009 and September 1, 2019 through the Embase and Medline databases using Boolean operators to locate appropriate articles. Results A total of 637 articles were discovered after the removal of duplicates, and 46 of these were selected for evaluation. Further, a quality assessment was performed using GRADE evaluation criteria. Conclusions Shoulder finish line preparations had slightly better marginal fit compared to chamfer finish lines. Crowns obtained from digital impressions had comparable to superior marginal adaptation compared to conventional impressions. Increasing cement space showed to improve zirconia crown adaptation. Cementation and veneering zirconia frameworks found to increase the marginal and internal gaps. Limited information is available on the effect of the alteration of sintering time/Temperature and/or sintering techniques on the adaptation of zirconia crowns. Most of the selected studies had a moderate quality assessment evaluation. Future studies could investigate the chair‐side, ultra‐fast sintering effect on the marginal gap of zirconia crowns.

show abstract

Effect of digital impressions and production protocols on the adaptation of zirconia copings

Cited by 31 publications

References 51 publications

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fit of Metal, Zirconia, and Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Different Manufacturing Techniques

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fit of Metal, Zirconia, and Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Different Manufacturing Techniques

Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit zirconia frameworks fabricated with CAD-CAM technology using direct and indirect digital scans

Fit of tooth‐supported zirconia single crowns—A systematic review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About