Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The clinical accuracy of single crowns exclusively fabricated by digital workflow—the comparison of two systems

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

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of the study was to compare the accuracy of crowns exclusively fabricated by the digital workflow of two systems. The null hypothesis stated was: Both systems do not differ with respect to marginal and internal accuracy.

Materials and methods

In 14 patients, 13 molars and 1 premolar were prepared. Each preparation was scanned intraorally with two different digital impression systems, Lava COS and Cerec AC. On the basis of these data, Lava DVS crowns [DVS] and Vita Rapid Layering Technique crowns [RLT] were fabricated, respectively. Both systems contained of a zirconia framework and a digitally fabricated silicate ceramic veneering. The marginal and internal fit of the crowns was documented by a replica technique. The replicas were examined under microscope with a magnification of ×200. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was applied in order to test if the values of the two systems showed significant differences at p ≤ 0.05.

Results

The results were as follows in micrometers (±standard deviation): at the marginal gap, 51 (±38) for [DVS] and 83 (±51) for [RLT]; mid-axial, 130 (±56) for [DVS] and 128 (±66) for [RLT]; axio-occlusal, 178 (±55) for [DVS] and 230 (±71) for [RLT]; and centro-occlusal, 181 (±41) for [DVS] and 297 (±76) for [RLT]. According to the Wilcoxon signed rank test, the results differed significantly at the marginal, axio-occlusal, and centro-occlusal gaps.

Conclusions

The null hypothesis had to be rejected.

Clinical relevance

The exclusively digital workflow on the basis of intraoral digital impressions delivered clinically satisfying results for single crowns with both systems.

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. Jager K, Vogtlin C (2012) [Digital workflow with the Lava Chairside Oral Scanner C.O.S. and Lava technique]. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 122 (4):307–324. doi:smfz-2012-04-01

  2. Fasbinder DJ (2010) Digital dentistry: innovation for restorative treatment. Compend Contin Educ Dent 31(Spec. No. 4):2–11 (quiz 12)

  3. Craddock MR, Windhorn RJ (2011) Is the US Army Dental Corps ready for the digital impression? US Army Med Dep J Jan–Mar:38–41

  4. Mehl A, Hickel R (1999) Current state of development and perspectives of machine-based production methods for dental restorations. Int J Comput Dent 2(1):9–35

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gozdowski S, Reich S (2009) A comparison of the fabrication times of all-ceramic partial crowns: Cerec 3D vs IPS Empress. Int J Comput Dent 12(3):279–289

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kurbad A (2011) Digital veneering—manufacturing computer-generated veneers with the CAD-on technique. Int J Comput Dent 14(3):255–271

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wiedhahn K (2011) The impression-free Cerec multilayer bridge with the CAD-on method. Int J Comput Dent 14(1):33–45

    Google Scholar 

  8. Holmes JR, Sulik WD, Holland GA, Bayne SC (1992) Marginal fit of castable ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 67(5):594–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schwickerath H (1979) Marginal cleft and solubility. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 34(9):664–669

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA (1971) The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 131(3):107–111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Luthy H, Hammerle CH (2007) Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 20(4):383–388

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pfeiffer J (1998) Dental CAD/CAM technologies: the optical impression (I). Int J Comput Dent 1(1):29–33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pfeiffer J (1999) Dental CAD/CAM technologies: the optical impression (II). Int J Comput Dent 2(1):65–72

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mehl A, Ender A, Mormann W, Attin T (2009) Accuracy testing of a new intraoral 3D camera. Int J Comput Dent 12(1):11–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rohaly J (2009) The development of the Lava chairside oral scanner C.O.S. technology—masterstroke of a legion of talented and committed people. Interview by Laslo Faith. Int J Comput Dent 12(2):165–169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ender A, Mehl A (2011) Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions—an in-vitro study. Int J Comput Dent 14(1):11–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kohorst P, Junghanns J, Dittmer MP, Borchers L, Stiesch M (2011) Different CAD/CAM-processing routes for zirconia restorations: influence on fitting accuracy. Clin Oral Invest 15(4):527–536. doi:10.1007/S00784-010-0415-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fransson B, Oilo G, Gjeitanger R (1985) The fit of metal–ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1(5):197–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G (2008) Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns—validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil 35(2):116–122. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2003.01203.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 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(4):521–526. doi:10.1007/S00784-010-0414-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Reich S, Kappe K, Teschner H, Schmitt J (2008) Clinical fit of four-unit zirconia posterior fixed dental prostheses. Eur J Oral Sci 116(6):579–584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kastner K, Walter MH (2000) Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 84(4):419–424

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Molin M, Karlsson S (1993) The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 51(4):201–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Holst S, Karl M, Wichmann M, Matta RE (2011) A new triple-scan protocol for 3D fit assessment of dental restorations. Quintessence Int 42(8):651–657

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Luthardt RG, Bornemann G, Lemelson S, Walter MH, Huls A (2004) An innovative method for evaluation of the 3-D internal fit of CAD/CAM crowns fabricated after direct optical versus indirect laser scan digitizing. Int J Prosthodont 17(6):680–685

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M (2008) Marginal and internal fit of metal–ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 24(10):1311–1315. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.02.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 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(7):553–559. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2010.03.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Scotti R, Cardelli P, Baldissara P, Monaco C (2011) Clinical fitting of CAD/CAM zirconia single crowns generated from digital intraoral impressions based on active wavefront sampling. J Dent. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2011.10.005

  29. Tuntiprawon M, Wilson PR (1995) The effect of cement thickness on the fracture strength of all-ceramic crowns. Aust Dent J 40(1):17–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Moldovan O, Luthardt RG, Corcodel N, Rudolph H (2011) Three-dimensional fit of CAD/CAM-made zirconia copings. Dent Mater 27(12):1273–1278. doi:10.1016/J.Dental.2011.09.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by 3M Deutschland, Sirona, and Vita Zahnfabrik. The authors would like to thank the dental technicians of Dental-Labor Geiger (Schwäbisch Gmünd, Germany), Mr. Andre Rübben, and Mr. Matthias Hodecker for their kind cooperation.

Conflict of interest

During the years, the authors SW and SR have held oral presentations and/or courses receiving a separate and appropriate honorarium each from at least one of the companies 3M Deutschland, Sirona, and Vita Zahnfabrik that supported the present study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthodontics, Implantology and Biomaterials, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany

    Petya K. Brawek, Stefan Wolfart, Lutz Endres & Sven Reich

  2. Department of Dental Materials and Biomaterials Research, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Armin Kirsten

Authors
  1. Petya K. Brawek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Wolfart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lutz Endres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Armin Kirsten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sven Reich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sven Reich.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brawek, P.K., Wolfart, S., Endres, L. et al. The clinical accuracy of single crowns exclusively fabricated by digital workflow—the comparison of two systems. Clin Oral Invest 17, 2119–2125 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0923-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0923-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation