Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the fit of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from conventional silicone impressions with the fit of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions.

Methods

Thirty patients with 30 posterior teeth with a prosthetic demand were selected. Zirconia-based ceramic crowns were made using an intraoral digital impression system (Ultrafast Optical Sectioning technology) (digital group, D) and 2-step silicone impression technique (conventional group, C).

To replicate the interface between the crown and the preparation, each crown was cemented on its corresponding clinical preparation using ultra-flow silicone. Each crown was embedded in resin to stabilize the registered interface. Specimens were sectioned in buccolingual orientation, and internal misfit was measured at different areas using stereomicroscopy (×40).

Data was analysed using Student’s t test and Mann-Whitney test (α = 0.05).

Results

No statistically significant differences were found (P > 0.05) between two groups. The mean internal misfit and mean marginal misfit were 170.9 μm (SD = 119.4)/106.6 μm (SD = 69.6) for group D and 185.4 μm (SD = 112.1)/119.9 μm (SD = 59.9) for group C.

Conclusion

Ceramic crowns fabricated using an intraoral scanner are comparable to elastomer conventional impressions in terms of their marginal and internal fits. The mean marginal fit in both groups was within the limits of clinical acceptability.

Clinical significance

Impressions based on Ultrafast Optical Sectioning technology can be used for manufacturing ceramic crowns in a normal workflow, with the same results as silicone conventional impressions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gardner F (1982) Margins of complete crowns-literature review. J Prosthet Dent 48:396–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hunter A, Hunter AR (1990) Gingival margins for crowns: a review and discusion II. Discrepancies and configurations. J Prosthet Dent 64:636–642

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Richter J, Edelhoff D, Wolfgang G (2009) Influence of preparation angle on marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM fabricated zirconia crowns copings. Quintessence Int 40:243–250

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Contrepois M, Soenen A, Bartala M, Laviole O (2013) Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 110:447–454 e10. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.08.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Martinez-Rus F, Suarez MJ, Rivera B, Pradies G (2011) Evaluation of the absolute marginal discrepancy of zirconia-based ceramic copings. J Prosthet Dent 105:108–114. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60009-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sailer I, Fehér A, Filser F, Gauckler LI, Lüthy H, Hämmerle CH (2007) Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 20:383–388

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. KL K, Campbell CS (2000) Periodontal tissue responses after insertion of artificial crowns and fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 84:492–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mitchell CA, Pintado MR (2001) Nondestructive, in vitro quantification of crown margins. J Prosthet Dent 85:575–584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Reich S, Wichmann M, Nkenke E (2005) Clinical fit of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures, generated with three different CAD/CAM systems. Eur J Oral Sci 113:174–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Reich S, Kappe K, Teschner H, Schimitt J (2008) Clinical fit of four-unit zirconia posterior fixed dental prostheses. Eur J Oral Sci 116:579–584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kohorst P, Brinkmann H, Li J, Borchers L, Stiesch M (2009) Marginal accuracy of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses fabricated using different computer-aided manufacturing systems. Eur J Oral Sci 117:319–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McLean J, Von Fraunhofer JA (1971) The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vitro technique. Br Dent J 13:107–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Al-Bakri IAHD, Al-Omari WM (2007) The dimensional accuracy of four impression techniques with the use of addition silicone impression materials. J Clin Dent 18:29–33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Schweiger J (2008) Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated resto- rations. Br Dent J 204:505–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. JEK A e S, Edelhoff D, Stimmelmayr M, Güth JF (2014) Marginal internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Invest 18:515–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Birnbaum NS, Aaronson HB (2008) Dental impression using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality. Compend Contin Educ Dent 29:494–505

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Christensen GJ (2008) Will digital impressions eliminate the cur- rent problems with conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc 139:761–763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Suárez M, González de Villaumbrosia P, Pradíes G, Lozano J (2003) Comparison of the marginal fit Procera AllCeram crowns with two finish lines. Int J Prosthodont 16:229–233

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Conrad H, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ (2007) Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 98:389–404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D, Klein C, Cerny B, Brodesser J (2010) Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. J Dent 38:553–559. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2010.03.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Duret F (1996) CAD/CAM in dentistry: present and future applications. In current concepts. Quintessence Int 27:433–436

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schaefer O, Decker M, Wittstock F, Kuepper H, Guentsch A (2014) Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro. J Dent 42:677–683

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B (2013) Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Invest 17:1759–1764. doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0864-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Logozzo S, Zannetti EM, Franceschini G (2014) Recent advances in dental optics. Part I: 3D intraoral scanners for restorative dentistry. Opt Lasers Eng 54:203–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wismeijer D, Mans R, Van Genuchten M, Reijers HA (2014) Patients’ preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (intraoral scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 25:1113–1118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H (2014) Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health 14

  27. Fasbinder DJ (2010) Innovation for restorative treatment. Compend Contin Educ Dent 31:2–11

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Brawek SW, Wolfarts S, Endres L, Kirsten A, Reich S (2013) The clinical accuracy of single crowns exclusively fabricated by digital workflow—the comparison of two systems. Clin Oral Invest 17:2119–2125. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-0923-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ender A, Melh A (2013) Influence of scanind strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int Comput Dent 16:11–21

    Google Scholar 

  30. Martins LM, Lorenzoni FC, Melo AO, Silva LM, Oliveira JL, Oliveira PC, et al. (2012) Internal fit of two all ceramic systems and metal ceramic crowns. J App Oral Sci 20:235–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tsitrou EA, Northeast SE, Van Noort R (2007) Evaluation of the marginal fit of three margin designs of resin composite crowns using CAD-CAM. J Dent 35:68–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wettstein F, Sailer I, Roos M, Hämmerle CH (2008) Clinical study of the internal gaps of zirconia and metal frameworks for fixed partial dentures. Eur J Oral Sci 116:272–279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Souza ROA, Özcan M, Pavanelli CA, Buso L, Lombardo GH, Michida SM, Mesquita AM, Bottino MA (2012) Marginal and internal discrepancies related to margin design of ceramic crowns fabricated by a CAD-CAM system. J Prosthodont 21:94–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G (2008) Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns validation of the silicone replic method. J Oral Rehabil 35:116–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Reich S, Uhlen S, Gozdowski S, Lohbauer U (2011) Measurement of cement thickness under lithium disilicate crowns using an impression material technique. Clin Oral Invest 15:521–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pradíes G, Zarauz C, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Martínez-Rus F (2015) Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology. J Dent Feb 43:201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik W (1989) Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent:405–408

  38. Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B (2015) Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Invest 19(8):2027–2034

  39. Keul C, Stawarczy B, Erdelt KJ, Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Guth JF (2014) Fit of 4-unit FDPs made of zirconia and CoCr-alloy after chairside and labside digitalization-a laboratory study. Dent Mater J 30:400–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Euán R, Figueras-Álvarez O, Cabratosa-Temes J, Oliver-Parra R (2014) Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. J Prosthet Dent 112:155–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ng J, Ruse D, Wyatt C (2014) A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent 112:555–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Fahmy NZ (2011) Influence of veneering materials on the marginal fit and fracture resistance of an alumina core system. J Prosthodont 20:45–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ferreira Quintas A, Oliveira F, Bottino MA (2004) Vertical marginal discrepancy of ceramic copings with differents ceramic materials, finish lines, and luting agents: an in vitro evaluation. J Prosthet Dent 92:250–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Beuer F, Naumann M, Gernet W, Sorensen JA (2009) Precision of fit: zirconia three-unit fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Invest 13:34–39

    Google Scholar 

  45. Grenade C, Mainjot A, Vanheusden A (2011) Fit of single tooth zirconia copings: comparison between vairous manufacuring processes. J Prosthet Dent 105:249–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was partially supported by a grant from Phibo Dental Solutions S.L. This manuscript has not been published and is not consideration for publication elsewhere. All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Buccofacial Prostheses, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal, S/N Ciudad Universitaria, 28040, Madrid, Spain

    S. Berrendero, M. P. Salido, A. Valverde, A. Ferreiroa & G. Pradíes

Authors
  1. S. Berrendero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. P. Salido
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Valverde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Ferreiroa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. Pradíes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Berrendero.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Berrendero, S., Salido, M.P., Valverde, A. et al. Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Invest 20, 2403–2410 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1714-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1714-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation