Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of biogenerically reconstructed and waxed-up complete occlusal surfaces with respect to the original tooth morphology

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

Abstract

Objectives

Recently, it has become possible to reconstruct complete occlusal surfaces using the biogeneric tooth model. This study aimed to mathematically assess and compare the morphologic agreement between original morphology and CAD-reconstructed, waxed-up and CAM partial crowns.

Materials and methods

Thirty-nine intact first permanent molars (39 participants) were included. Impressions, bite registrations and three gypsum replicas were made. Preparations for CAD/CAM partial crowns were performed and scanned. The restorations were biogenerically reconstructed (CEREC® v3.80) and milled. Wax-ups of these preparations were scanned as well as the milled restorations and original teeth. Discrepancies were evaluated by matching the scans with the original morphologies (Match3D, output: volume/area, z difference) and by contact patterns. The discrepancies were compared between CAD-reconstructions and either wax-ups or milled restorations (paired t test, α = 0.025 for two multiple tests).

Results

The mean differences between natural tooth morphology (triangular stabilisation 71.8 %) and biogeneric reconstructions, wax-ups and milled restorations (triangular stabilisation 87.2 %) were: 184 ± 36 μm (volume/area), 187 ± 41 μm (z difference); 263 ± 40 μm (volume/area), 269 ± 45 μm (z difference) and 182 ± 40 μm (volume/area), 184 ± 41 μm (z difference). Differences associated with biogeneric reconstructions were significantly less than those of wax-ups (volume/area and z difference, p < 0.0001), but not significantly different than those of milled restorations (p = 0.423 (volume/area), p = 0.110 (z difference)).

Conclusions

CAD software enables a closer reconstruction of teeth than do wax-ups, even when no cusps remain. The milling device is precise enough to transfer CAD into the final restoration.

Clinical relevance

This study shows that state of the art CAD/CAM can effectively produce natural tooth morphology and may be ideal for fixed partial dentures.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Türp JC, Greene CS, Strub JE (2008) Dental occlusion: a critical reflection on past, present and future concepts. J Oral Rehabil 35:446–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mattiola A, Mörmann WH, Lutz F (1995) The computer-generated occlusion of CEREC-2 inlays and onlays. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 105:1284–1290

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. De Nisco S, Mörmann WH (1996) Computer-generated occlusion of Cerec2 inlays and overlays. In: Mörmann WH (ed) Cad/Cam in aesthetic dentistry, Cerec 10 year anniversary symposium. Quintessence, Berlin, pp 391–407

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jedynakiewicz NM, Martin N (2001) Functionally generated pathway theory, application and development in Cerec restorations. Int J Comput Dent 4:25–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mörmann WH, Brandestini G (1989) Die Cerec Computer Rekonstruktion: inlays. Onlays und Veneers, Quintessenz

    Google Scholar 

  6. Reich S, Wichmann M, Burgel P (2005) The self-adjusting crown (SAC). Int J Comput Dent 8:47–58

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hartung F, Kordass B (2006) Comparison of the contact surface pattern between virtual and milled Cerec 3D full-ceramic crowns. Int J Comput Dent 9:126–136

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mehl A, Blanz V, Hickel R (2005) Biogeneric tooth: a new mathematical representation for tooth morphology in lower first molars. Eur J Oral Sci 113:333–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mehl A, Blanz V, Hickel R (2005) A new mathematical process for the calculation of average forms of teeth. J Prosthet Dent 94:561–566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Richter J, Mehl A (2006) Evaluation for the fully automatic inlay reconstruction by means of the biogeneric tooth model. Int J Comput Dent 9:101–111

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dunn M (2007) Biogeneric and user-friendly: the Cerec 3D software upgrade V3.00. Int J Comput Dent 10:109–117

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ender A, Mörmann WH, Mehl A (2011) Efficiency of a mathematical model in generating CAD/CAM-partial crowns with natural tooth morphology. Clin Oral Invest 15:283–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Schenk O (2010) Biogeneric—another step closer to nature. Int J Comput Dent 13:169–174

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ahlers MO, Mörig G, Blunk U, Hajtó J, Pröbster L, Frankenberger R (2009) Guidelines for the preparation of CAD/CAM ceramic inlays and partial crowns. Int J Comput Dent 12:309–325

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mehl A, Gloger W, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (1997) A new optical 3-D device for the detection of wear. J Dent Res 76:1799–1807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dupont WD, Plummer WD (1990) Power and sample size calculations: a review and computer program. Control Clin Trials 11:116–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ellerbrock C, Kordass B (2011) Comparison of computer generated occlusal surfaces with functionally waxed-on surfaces. Int J Comput Dent 14:23–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mehl A, Ender A, Mörmann W, Attin T (2009) Accuracy testing of a new intraoral 3D camera. Int J Comput Dent 12:11–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Arnetzl G, Pongratz D (2005) Milling precision and fitting accuracy of Cerec Scan milled restorations. Int J Comput Dent 8:283–281

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fasbinder DJ (2006) Clinical performance of chairside Cad/Cam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 137(Suppl):22S–31S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Reich SM, Peltz ID, Wichmann M, Estafan DJ (2005) A comparative study of two Cerec software systems in evaluating manufacturing time and accuracy of restorations. Gen Dent 53:195–198

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Reich S, Brungsberg B, Teschner H, Frankenberger R (2010) The occlusal precision of laboratory versus CAD/CAM processed all-ceramic crowns. Am J Dent 23:53–56

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kurbad A, Schock HA (2009) A method for the easy fabrication of all-ceramic bridges with the Cerec system. Int J Comput Dent 12:171–185

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Baltzer A, Kaufmann-Jinoian V (2007) VITA CAD-Temp for inLab and Cerec 3D. Int J Comput Dent 10:99–103

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank ZA Michael Nemecek, Dr. Christian Jauernig and the students enrolled in the preclinical course, Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, in 2010 for their contributions to this study. We express our gratitude to the master dental technician, Robert Kollmuß, for doing the wax-ups. We thank Prof. Mehl for valuable discussion regarding the design of the study. We also thank the Sirona Company for allocating the data transformation program and VITA Zahnfabrik for providing us with the ceramic blanks.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology and Paedodontics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany

    Maximilian Kollmuss, Franz-Michael Jakob, Hans-Georg Kirchner, Nicoleta Ilie, Reinhard Hickel & Karin Christine Huth

  2. Department of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany

    Karin Christine Huth

Authors
  1. Maximilian Kollmuss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Franz-Michael Jakob
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hans-Georg Kirchner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicoleta Ilie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Reinhard Hickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karin Christine Huth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karin Christine Huth.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kollmuss, M., Jakob, FM., Kirchner, HG. et al. Comparison of biogenerically reconstructed and waxed-up complete occlusal surfaces with respect to the original tooth morphology. Clin Oral Invest 17, 851–857 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0749-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0749-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation