Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Marginal and internal fit of feldspathic ceramic CAD/CAM crowns fabricated via different extraoral digitization methods: a micro-computed tomography analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the fit of feldspathic ceramic crowns fabricated via 3 different extraoral digitizing methods. Twelve maxillary first premolars were prepared and 36 single crowns were fabricated via 3 extraoral digitizing methods using a laboratory scanner (n = 12): (1) scanning the typodont (ST [control] group); (2) scanning the impression (SI group); (3) scanning the stone cast (SC group). Micro-computed tomography was used to calculate two-dimensional marginal-internal gap and the three-dimensional volumetric gap between the crowns and their corresponding dies. The measured gaps were divided into 6 location categories as follows: marginal gap (MG), finish line gap (FLG), axial wall gap (AWG), cuspal gap (CG), proximal transition gap (PTG), and central fossa gap (CFG). The correlation between each of the 3 extraoral digitizing methods and the adaptation status of the crown margins were also evaluated. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman’s rank test, and Chi-square test were used for data analysis (α = 0.05). The marginal gaps in the ST, SI, and SC groups differed significantly (24, 198 and 117.6 µm, respectively) (p < 0.05). Significant differences were found between the groups with regard to internal gap measurements, with SI representing higher gap measurements at FLG, PTG and CFG locations (p < 0.05). 3D volumetric gap measurements did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). Under-extended margins observed in the SI and SC groups were correlated with the digitizing method (Cramer’s V-square: 0.14). When performing extraoral digitalization, clinicians should choose to scan the stone cast as scanning the stone cast resulted in better internal and marginal fit compared to scanning the impression.

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. Blatz MB, Chiche G, Bahat O, Roblee R, Coachman C, Heymann HO. Evolution of aesthetic dentistry. J Dent Res. 2019;98(12):1294–304.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Guichet DL. Digital workflows in the management of the esthetically discriminating patient. Dent Clin North Am. 2019;63(2):331–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mormann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(Suppl):7S-13S.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vecsei B, Joos-Kovacs G, Borbely J, Hermann P. Comparison of the accuracy of direct and indirect three-dimensional digitizing processes for CAD/CAM systems: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2017;61(2):177–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Güth J-F, Keul C, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Invest. 2013;17(4):1201–8.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Tabesh R, Dudley J. A Comparison of marginal gaps of all-ceramic crowns constructed from scanned impressions and models. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31(1):71–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Marsango V, Bollero R, D’Ovidio N, Miranda M, Bollero P, Barlattani A Jr. Digital work-flow. Oral Implantol (Rome). 2014;7(1):20–4.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Christensen GJ. In-office CAD/CAM milling of restorations: the future? J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139(1):83–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee WS, Kim WC, Kim HY, Kim WT, Kim JH. Evaluation of different approaches for using a laser scanner in digitization of dental impressions. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(1):22–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Kenyon BJ, Hagge MS, Leknius C, Daniels WC, Weed ST. Dimensional accuracy of 7 die materials. J Prosthodont. 2005;14(1):25–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ceyhan JA, Johnson GH, Lepe X, Phillips KM. A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(3):228–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Price RB, Gerrow JD, Sutow EJ, MacSween R. The dimensional accuracy of 12 impression material and die stone combinations. Int J Prosthodont. 1991;4(2):169–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Alfaro DP, Ruse ND, Carvalho RM, Wyatt CC. Assessment of the internal fit of lithium disilicate crowns using micro-CT. J Prosthodont. 2015;24(5):381–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989;62(4):405–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;98(5):389–404.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sailer I, Makarov NA, Thoma DS, Zwahlen M, Pjetursson BE. All-ceramic or metal-ceramic tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)? A systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Part I: Single crowns (SCs). Dent Mater. 2015;31(6):603–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Malaguti G, Rossi R, Marziali B, Esposito A, Bruno G, Dariol C, Dl FA. In vitro evaluation of prosthodontic impression on natural dentition: a comparison between traditional and digital techniques. Oral Implantol (Rome). 2016;9:21–7.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gressler May L, Kelly JR, Bottino MA, Hill T. Influence of the resin cement thickness on the fatigue failure loads of CAD/CAM feldspathic crowns. Dent Mater. 2015;31(8):895–900.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ng J, Ruse D, Wyatt C. A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(3):555–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Euan R, Figueras-Alvarez O, Cabratosa-Termes J, Oliver-Parra R. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(2):155–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shembesh M, Ali A, Finkelman M, Weber HP, Zandparsa R. An in vitro comparison of the marginal adaptation accuracy of CAD/CAM restorations using different impression systems. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(7):581–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971;131(3):107–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Al Hamad KQ, Al Rashdan BA, Al Omari WM, Baba NZ. Comparison of the fit of lithium disilicate crowns made from conventional, digital, or conventional/digital techniques. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(2):e580–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Praca L, Pekam FC, Rego RO, Radermacher K, Wolfart S, Marotti J. Accuracy of single crowns fabricated from ultrasound digital impressions. Dent Mater. 2018;34(11):e280–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Liang S, Yuan F, Luo X, Yu Z, Tang Z. Digital evaluation of absolute marginal discrepancy: a comparison of ceramic crowns fabricated with conventional and digital techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(4):525–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Shimizu S, Shinya A, Kuroda S, Gomi H. The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of fixed dental prostheses. Dent Mater J. 2017;36(4):402–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Alharbi N, Alharbi S, Cuijpers V, Osman RB, Wismeijer D. Three-dimensional evaluation of marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed interim restorations fabricated on different finish line designs. J Prosthodont Res. 2018;62(2):218–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kim JH, Jeong JH, Lee JH, Cho HW. Fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated from conventional and digital impressions assessed with micro-CT. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(4):551–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mostafa NZ, Ruse ND, Ford NL, Carvalho RM, Wyatt CCL. Marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated using conventional and digital methodology: a three-dimensional analysis. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(2):145–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Peroz I, Mitsas T, Erdelt K, Kopsahilis N. Marginal adaptation of lithium disilicate ceramic crowns cemented with three different resin cements. Clin Oral Invest. 2019;23(1):315–20.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Contrepois M, Soenen A, Bartala M, Laviole O. Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110(6):447–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Carbajal Mejia JB, Wakabayashi K, Nakamura T, Yatani H. Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(3):392–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 5th ed. St Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2016. p. 184–208.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bohner LOL, De Luca CG, Marcio BS, Lagana DC, Sesma N, Tortamano NP. Computer-aided analysis of digital dental impressions obtained from intraoral and extraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(5):617–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Persson AS, Oden A, Andersson M, Sandborgh-Englund G. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness. Dent Mater. 2009;25(7):929–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: an in-vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2015;59(4):236–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kim SB, Kim NH, Kim JH, Moon HS. Evaluation of the fit of metal copings fabricated using stereolithography. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(5):693–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ahlholm P, Sipila K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(1):35–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sulaiman F, Chai J, Jameson LM, Wozniak WT. A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress, and Procera crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 1997;10(5):478–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Karlsson S. The fit of Procera titanium crowns. An in vitro and clinical study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1993;51(3):129–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. May LG, Kelly JR, Bottino MA, Hill T. Effects of cement thickness and bonding on the failure loads of CAD/CAM ceramic crowns: multi-physics FEA modeling and monotonic testing. Dent Mater. 2012;28(8):e99-109.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Molin MK, Karlsson SL, Kristiansen MS. Influence of film thickness on joint bend strength of a ceramic/resin composite joint. Dent Mater. 1996;12(4):245–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Borba M, Cesar PF, Griggs JA, Della BA. Adaptation of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Dent Mater. 2011;27(11):1119–26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special appreciation is expressed to Prof. Dr. Ensar Baspinar as the statistical analyzer.

Funding

This study did not receive any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, İncitaş Street, Emniyet District, Box 06560, Yenimahalle, Ankara, Turkey

    Ece İrem Oğuz & Mehmet Ali Kılıçarslan

  2. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey

    Mert Ocak

  3. Deparment of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Medipol University, Ankara, Turkey

    Burak Bilecenoğlu

  4. Private Practice, Istanbul, Turkey

    Zeynep Ekici

Authors
  1. Ece İrem Oğuz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehmet Ali Kılıçarslan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mert Ocak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Burak Bilecenoğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zeynep Ekici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ece İrem Oğuz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors deny any conflicts of interest in regards to the current study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oğuz, E.İ., Kılıçarslan, M.A., Ocak, M. et al. Marginal and internal fit of feldspathic ceramic CAD/CAM crowns fabricated via different extraoral digitization methods: a micro-computed tomography analysis. Odontology 109, 440–447 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-020-00560-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-020-00560-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation