Full-arch prostheses from translucent zirconia: Accuracy of fit

Sachs, Caroline; Groesser, Julian; Stadelmann, Markus; Schweiger, Josef; Erdelt, Kurt; Beuer, Florian

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2014.05.001

Cited by 47 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These approaches include direct view technique using external microscope, cross‐sectioning, replica technique, profile projector, and microtomography . However, most of the studies have assessed the marginal fit of zirconia prostheses with external microscopes and the internal fit with either internal microscopes or replica technique . In this study, we measured the marginal gaps by optical microscope due to its non‐destructive nature, feasibility, and practicality.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal Discrepancies of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns: The Influence of Preparation Designs and Sintering Techniques

Ahmed

Abdallah

McCullagh

et al. 2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The marginal fit is an essential component for the clinical success of prosthodontic restorations. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different abutment finish line widths and crown thicknesses on the marginal fit of zirconia crowns fabricated using either standard or fast sintering protocols. Materials and Methods Six titanium abutments were fabricated for receiving zirconia molar crowns. Crowns were designed virtually and milled from partially sintered zirconia blanks and divided into 12 groups (n = 10/group). Crowns in groups 1 to 6 were sintered by standard sintering, while those in groups 7 to 12 were sintered by fast sintering. Groups were further categorized according to abutment finish line and crown thickness: G1/G7 (0.5 mm chamfer, 0.8 mm thick); G2/G8 (0.5 mm chamfer, 1.5 mm thick); G3/G9 (1.0 mm chamfer, 0.8 mm thick); G4/10 (1.0 mm chamfer, 1.5 mm thick); G5/G11 (1.2 mm chamfer, 0.8 mm thick); G6/G12 (1.2 mm chamfer, 1.5 mm thick). The marginal gaps were assessed at 8 locations using digital microscopy. The linear mixed effect model analysis was performed at a significance level of 0.05. Results All vertical marginal gaps were within the clinically acceptable range (∼11‐52 μm). G8 (FS, 0.5 mm chamfer, 1.5 mm thick) demonstrated the largest gaps (47.95 μm, 95% CI: 44.57‐51.23), whereas G3 (SS, 1.0 mm chamfer, 0.8 thick) had the smallest marginal gap (14.43 μm, 95% CI: 11.15‐17.71). A linear mixed effect models showed significant differences for the interaction between finish line × crown thickness × sintering (F = 18.96, p < 0.001). The lingual surfaces showed the largest gaps in both sintering protocols, while the mesial and mesiobuccal surfaces demonstrated the smallest gaps. Conclusions There was a significant interaction between finish line widths, crown thickness, and sintering protocol on the marginal gaps in both sintering protocols; 1.0 mm finish line preparations with either 0.8 mm or 1.5 mm occlusal reduction had better marginal fit in both sintering protocols compared to 0.5 mm or 1.2 mm finish lines. Smaller marginal discrepancies were observed for standard sintering crowns with a 0.5 mm finish line and 1.5 mm occlusal reduction. Conservative occlusal reduction should be accompanied with a 1.2 mm finish line to obtain better marginal fit for full‐contoured zirconia crowns.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal Discrepancies of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns: The Influence of Preparation Designs and Sintering Techniques

Ahmed

Abdallah

McCullagh

et al. 2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The marginal fit in restorations is of utmost importance for their quality and longevity, and was one of the main initial concerns of the CAD/CAM systems [16]. The marginal fit is theoretically represented by a linear contact line or a gap-free transition between the preparation and the restoration margin.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava™ C.O.S and conventional impression technique

Dauti¹,

Cvikl²,

Franz³

et al. 2016

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEvaluation of the marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with Lava™ Chairside Oral Scanner in comparison to that of zirconia copings manufactured after conventional impressions with polyvinyl siloxane.MethodsA prepared typodont tooth #36, was replicated 40 times with a vinyl silicone and precise model resin. The dies were randomly divided into two groups according to the impression taking technique. Digital impressions with Lava™ C.O.S. and conventional impressions were taken according to the group. Subsequently zirconia copings were manufactured and cemented on their respective dies with zinc oxide phosphate cement. After embedding in resin, mesio-distal section of each coping was performed with a diamond saw in order to obtain two slices. One half of the specimen was used for evaluation with an optical microscope (OM) and the other half for evaluation with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Marginal gap (MG) and absolute marginal discrepancy (AMD) were measured mesial and distal on each slice.ResultsNo significant difference of the marginal parameters between the digital and the conventional group was found. The mean values for MG in the digital group were 96.28 μm (+/−43.21 μm) measured with the OM and 99.26 μm (+/−48.73 μm) measured with the SEM, respectively. AMD mean values were 191.54 μm (+/−85.42 μm) measured with the optical microscope and 211.6 μm (+/−96.55 μm) with the SEM. For the conventional group the mean MG values were 94.84 μm (+/−50.77 μm) measured with the OM and 83.37 μm (+/−44.38 μm) measured with the SEM, respectively. AMD mean values were 158.60 μm (+/−69.14 μm) for the OM and 152.72 μm (+/−72.36) for the SEM.ConclusionsCopings manufactured after digital impression with Lava™ C.O.S. show comparable marginal parameters with the copings manufactured after conventional impression with polyvinyl syloxane. The mean MG values of both groups fit in the clinically acceptable range.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-016-0323-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…The monolithic TZP restorations are limited in clinical application because these TZPs are opaque. To overcome this problem, translucent TZP has been researched and developed extensively [17][18][19][20][21][22] . In addition, recently, highly translucent TZP that enable color expression is commercially available with the trade name Zpex 23) , and there are high expectations for its clinical application.…”

Section: With Recent Developments In Cad/cam (Computer Aidedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translucency and flexural strength of monolithic translucent zirconia and porcelain-layered zirconia

Matsuzaki

Sekine

Honma

et al. 2015

Dental Materials Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of monolithic translucent TZP with different colors and porcelain-layered TZP by evaluating their colors and strengths. Different mixing ratios of Zpex to Zpex-Yellow as translucent TZP, conventional opaque TZP (TZ-3YB-E) (Tosoh, Tokyo) as a control, and veneering porcelain (CERABIEN ZR, body porcelain, Noritake, Tokyo) with shade A3 as a typical shade. Disk-shaped specimens of 13 mm diameter and 1.5 mm thickness were prepared. These specimens were observed under reflected and transmitted light, and the translucency parameter (TP) values were measured. Strength was also evaluated with flexural strength in a biaxial bending test. The TP values of the monolithic TZP, Zpex100>Zpex70>Zpex50>TZ3YB, were larger in this order. The flexural strength of all the monolithic TZP showed approximately 1,000 MPa. It is suggested that colored translucent TZP is clinically useful when used as monolithic restorations.

show abstract

Full-arch prostheses from translucent zirconia: Accuracy of fit

Cited by 47 publications

References 31 publications

Marginal Discrepancies of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns: The Influence of Preparation Designs and Sintering Techniques

Marginal Discrepancies of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns: The Influence of Preparation Designs and Sintering Techniques

Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava™ C.O.S and conventional impression technique

Translucency and flexural strength of monolithic translucent zirconia and porcelain-layered zirconia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About