Suppr超能文献

CAD/CAM与传统临时冠的体外对比评估。

Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns.

作者信息

Abdullah Adil Othman, Tsitrou Effrosyni A, Pollington Sarah

机构信息

- Erbil Polytechnic University, Department of Dental Prevention, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.

- Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Thessaloniki, Greece.

出版信息

J Appl Oral Sci. 2016 May-Jun;24(3):258-63. doi: 10.1590/1678-775720150451.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone "PEEK", Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0.

RESULTS

The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (P<0.001). The average internal fit was: VITA CAD-Temp® 124.94 (±22.96) µm, PEEK 113.14 (±23.55) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 110.95 (±11.64) µm, and Protemp™4 143.48(±26.74) µm. The average fracture strength was: VITA CAD-Temp® 361.01 (±21.61) N, PEEK 802.23 (±111.29) N, Telio CAD-Temp 719.24 (±95.17) N, and Protemp™4 416.40 (±69.14) N. One-way ANOVA test showed a statistically significant difference for marginal gap, internal gap, and fracture strength between all groups (p<0.001). However, the mode of fracture showed no differences between the groups (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

CAD/CAM fabricated provisional crowns demonstrated superior fit and better strength than direct provisional crowns.

摘要

目的

本研究比较了计算机辅助设计与制造(CAD/CAM)临时冠和直接法临时冠的边缘间隙、内部适合性、断裂强度及断裂模式。

材料与方法

按照牙体预备指南,对一颗右上第一前磨牙模型牙进行全瓷冠预备。测试材料包括:VITA CAD-Temp®、聚醚醚酮(“PEEK”)、Telio CAD-Temp和Protemp™4(对照组)。将临时冠分为四组(n = 10),第1组:VITA CAD-Temp®;第2组:PEEK;第3组:Telio CAD-Temp;第4组:Protemp™4。对每组临时冠均进行边缘和内部适合性、断裂强度及断裂模式的研究。使用GraphPad Prism 6.0软件进行统计分析。

结果

平均边缘间隙分别为:VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61(±9.99)µm、PEEK 46.75(±8.26)µm、Telio CAD-Temp 56.10(±5.65)µm、Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96)µm(P<0.001)。平均内部适合性分别为:VITA CAD-Temp® 124.94(±22.96)µm、PEEK 113.14(±23.55)µm、Telio CAD-Temp 110.95(±11.64)µm、Protemp™4 143.48(±26.74)µm。平均断裂强度分别为:VITA CAD-Temp® 361.01(±21.61)N、PEEK 802.23(±111.29)N、Telio CAD-Temp 719.24(±95.17)N、Protemp™4 416.40(±69.14)N。单因素方差分析显示,所有组之间在边缘间隙、内部间隙和断裂强度方面均存在统计学显著差异(p<0.001)。然而,各组之间的断裂模式无差异(p>0.05)。

结论

CAD/CAM制作的临时冠在适合性和强度方面优于直接法临时冠。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a8cf/5022219/4a15815b3e2f/1678-7757-jaos-24-3-0258-gf01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验