Suppr超能文献

CAD/CAM钛修复体与传统铸造修复体垂直边缘间隙的体外比较。

An in vitro comparison of vertical marginal gaps of CAD/CAM titanium and conventional cast restorations.

作者信息

Tan Philip L, Gratton David G, Diaz-Arnold Ana M, Holmes David C

机构信息

Department of Family Dentistry, University of Iowa College of Dentistry, Iowa City, IA, USA.

出版信息

J Prosthodont. 2008 Jul;17(5):378-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00302.x.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To determine if there was a significant difference between the vertical marginal openings of cast restorations, computer-aided design, and computer-aided machining restorations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten working dies were created from a single master die and used to fabricate ten restorations in each of the following groups: computer-aided design/computer-assisted machining (CAD/CAM), WAX/CAM, and WAX/CAST. The CAD/CAM titanium restorations were fabricated using the scanning and crown design modules of the KaVo Everest system. The WAX/CAM titanium restorations were fabricated using the double scan technique with the KaVo Everest system. The WAX/CAST high noble copings were fabricated using the conventional lost wax casting technique. The restorations were seated on the master die, and high-resolution digital photographs were made of the marginal area on all four sides. The vertical marginal opening was then measured using a calibrated digital software program. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc tests were used to determine the presence of statistically significant differences.

RESULTS

The vertical margin openings were CAD/CAM: 79.43 +/- 25.46 microm; WAX/CAM: 73.12 +/- 24.15 microm; WAX/CAST: 23.91 +/- 9.80 microm. There was a statistically significant difference between the WAX/CAST group and the remaining groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference between the vertical marginal gaps of the CAD/CAM and WAX/CAM. The WAX/CAST technique resulted in smaller vertical marginal gaps than either CAD/CAM or WAX/CAM.

摘要

目的

确定铸造修复体、计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助加工修复体的垂直边缘间隙之间是否存在显著差异。

材料与方法

从单个母模制作十个工作模,并用于在以下每组中制作十个修复体:计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助加工(CAD/CAM)、蜡型/CAM和蜡型/铸造。CAD/CAM钛修复体使用卡瓦依沃瑞斯特系统的扫描和牙冠设计模块制作。蜡型/CAM钛修复体使用卡瓦依沃瑞斯特系统的双重扫描技术制作。蜡型/铸造高贵金属基底冠使用传统失蜡铸造技术制作。将修复体就位在母模上,并对所有四个面的边缘区域拍摄高分辨率数码照片。然后使用校准的数字软件程序测量垂直边缘间隙。使用单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验来确定是否存在统计学上的显著差异。

结果

垂直边缘间隙分别为:CAD/CAM:79.43±25.46微米;蜡型/CAM:73.12±24.15微米;蜡型/铸造:23.91±9.80微米。蜡型/铸造组与其余组之间存在统计学上的显著差异。

结论

CAD/CAM和蜡型/CAM的垂直边缘间隙之间没有差异。蜡型/铸造技术产生的垂直边缘间隙比CAD/CAM或蜡型/CAM更小。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验