Suppr超能文献

传统和数字化制造的髓腔修复体的尺寸精度比较。

Comparison of dimensional accuracy of conventionally and digitally manufactured intracoronal restorations.

机构信息

Assistant Professor and Chair, School of Dental Technology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.

Assistant Professor, Operative Dentistry Department, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Feb;119(2):233-238. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.03.014. Epub 2017 Jun 2.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Advances have been made in digital dentistry for the fabrication of dental prostheses, but evidence regarding the efficacy of digital techniques for the fabrication of intracoronal restorations is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of intracoronal restorations fabricated with digital and conventional techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A sound mandibular molar tooth received a standard onlay preparation, and onlays were fabricated with 1 of 3 fabrication techniques. In group CC, the onlays were made after conventional impression and conventional fabrication of a resin pattern. In group CP, the onlays were made after conventional impression and 3-dimensional (3D) printing of the pattern. In group IP, the onlays were made after intraoral scanning, and 3D printing produced the resin pattern. Ten specimens in each group (N=30) were evaluated. Glass-ceramic restorations were fabricated using the press technique. The replica technique was used to assess the marginal fit. Each replica was assessed at 8 points. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the marginal discrepancy among the 3 groups. The Tukey honest significant differences test was applied for pairwise comparisons of the groups (α=.05).

RESULTS

No significant differences were noted in the marginal discrepancy at the gingival margin among the 3 groups (P=.342), but significant differences were noted among the 3 groups in the pulpal (P=.025) and lingual (P=.031) areas. Comparison of the absolute discrepancy among the 3 groups revealed that only groups CC and CP were significantly different (P=.020) from each other.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the conventional method yielded more accuracy than the 3D printing method, and no differences were found between the methods which used the 3D printer (groups CP and IP).

摘要

问题陈述

数字化牙科在牙种植体制造方面取得了进展,但缺乏关于数字化技术在牙内修复体制造方面功效的证据。

目的

本体外研究的目的是比较数字技术和传统技术制造牙内修复体的尺寸精度。

材料和方法

一颗下颌磨牙接受了标准的嵌体预备,然后使用 3 种制造技术中的 1 种制造嵌体。在 CC 组中,嵌体是在常规印模和常规制作树脂模型后制作的。在 CP 组中,嵌体是在常规印模和 3D 打印模型后制作的。在 IP 组中,嵌体是在口内扫描后制作的,3D 打印制作树脂模型。每组 10 个样本(N=30)进行评估。使用压制技术制作玻璃陶瓷修复体。复制技术用于评估边缘拟合度。每个复制品在 8 个点进行评估。使用单向方差分析比较 3 组之间的边缘差异。应用 Tukey 诚实显著差异检验进行组间两两比较(α=.05)。

结果

3 组在牙龈边缘的边缘差异无统计学差异(P=.342),但在牙髓(P=.025)和舌侧(P=.031)区域有统计学差异。3 组之间的绝对差异比较显示,只有 CC 组和 CP 组之间有显著差异(P=.020)。

结论

在本体外研究的限制范围内,传统方法比 3D 打印方法更准确,使用 3D 打印机的两种方法(CP 组和 IP 组)之间没有差异。

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