Prosthodontics Residency, Air Force Postgraduate Dental School, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Lackland AFB, TX.
Department of Prosthodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
J Prosthodont. 2017 Oct;26(7):571-580. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12606. Epub 2017 Jun 9.
Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) is becoming increasingly integrated into dental practice workflow at a pace that exceeds scientific validation. The aim of this study is to evaluate a complete digital split-file protocol relative to segmental digital and analog techniques for restoring a single maxillary anterior edentulous space with custom abutment and crown.
Four treatment workflows were assessed: complete digital (CD), segmental digital (SD), milled wax (AM), and heat pressed and hand waxed (AH) and heat pressed. The CD workflow "split" an abutment and crown into separate files to fabricate a zirconia abutment and both zirconia/lithium disilicate crown restorations. The SD workflow scanned the existing abutment for design of segmental restorations in zirconia, lithium disilicate, and milled wax (AM). The AH specimens were conventionally hand waxed. Both the AM and AH specimens were heat pressed with lithium disilicate. All restorations were evaluated with standardized measurements using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) as manufactured without internal adjustments and after manual adjustment. The number of adjustments, adjustment time, and location of adjustments were recorded. One-way ANOVA with repeated measures was used to report geometric means with 95% confidence intervals.
The mean marginal gap after adjustment of the CD group was 69 μm, with an upper bound (UB) of 79 μm and a lower bound (LB) of 60 μm. SD group mean was 26 μm with an UB of 31 μm and LB of 22 μm. The AM group mean was 32 μm, with an UB of 49 μm and a LB of 20 μm; AH group mean of 26 μm with an UB of 34 μm and a LB of 20 μm. The SD, AM, and AH workflows were statistically similar (p = 1.000), and the CD workflow was statistically greater than the other three (p < 0.001).
The split-file (CD) protocol results in marginal gap size within clinical standards after adjustment; however, 52 of the 60 digitally produced restorations showed a horizontal marginal offset that required adjustment for proper contours.
计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制造(CAD/CAM)在牙科实践中的应用日益普及,其发展速度超过了科学验证的速度。本研究的目的是评估一种完整的数字分体文件协议,相对于分段数字和模拟技术,用于修复单个上颌前缺牙间隙,使用定制基台和冠。
评估了四种治疗工作流程:全数字化(CD)、分段数字化(SD)、铣削蜡(AM)、热压和手工蜡(AH)和热压。CD 工作流程将基台和冠“分体”成单独的文件,以制造氧化锆基台和氧化锆/二硅酸锂冠修复体。SD 工作流程扫描现有基台,设计分段修复体,采用氧化锆、二硅酸锂和铣削蜡(AM)。AH 标本采用传统手工上蜡。AM 和 AH 标本均采用二硅酸锂热压。所有修复体均采用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)进行标准化测量,未经内部调整和手动调整后进行评估。采用重复测量的单因素方差分析报告几何平均值及其 95%置信区间。
CD 组调整后的平均边缘间隙为 69μm,上限(UB)为 79μm,下限(LB)为 60μm。SD 组平均值为 26μm,UB 为 31μm,LB 为 22μm。AM 组平均值为 32μm,UB 为 49μm,LB 为 20μm;AH 组平均值为 26μm,UB 为 34μm,LB 为 20μm。SD、AM 和 AH 工作流程在统计学上相似(p = 1.000),而 CD 工作流程与其他三个工作流程在统计学上差异显著(p < 0.001)。
分体文件(CD)协议在调整后可使边缘间隙大小符合临床标准;然而,60 个数字化制作的修复体中有 52 个显示出水平边缘偏移,需要进行调整以获得正确的轮廓。