Adjunct Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, Brazil.
Predoctoral student, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, Brazil.
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Sep;120(3):396-402. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.10.010. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
Factors that may affect the marginal adaptation of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) restorations include preparation design, impression technique, and CAD-CAM system. The influence of impression technique and preparation design on CAD-CAM partial coverage restorations has not been fully addressed.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of direct and indirect digital scanning techniques and 2 preparation designs on the marginal adaptation of CAD-CAM onlays.
Two mesio-occlusal buccal onlay preparations with reduction of the mesiobuccal cusp were made: conventional preparation (CP) with a 1.2-mm modified shoulder margin and modified preparation (MP) flat cuspal reduction without shoulder. Virtual models were generated from each preparation by using a digital scanner (BlueCam; Dentsply Sirona) from the plastic teeth (direct digital scan) or from the stone dies (indirect digital scan). Onlays were designed using a CAD-CAM system (CEREC 4.0; Dentsply Sirona), and nanoceramic resin blocks (Lava Ultimate Restorative; 3M ESPE) were milled using the CEREC MCX milling machine. Marginal discrepancy was evaluated using an optical stereomicroscope at ×25 magnification in 18 locations distributed along the margins of the preparation. The data were analyzed by using 3-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey HSD test (α=.05).
CP presented a statistically significant reduced average marginal adaptation (59 ±50 μm) than did MP (69 ±58 μm) (P<.001). The Tukey HSD test showed the presence of a significantly larger marginal discrepancy in the mesial and buccal locations of MP when compared with CP. Regarding impression techniques, the buccal location presented the smallest average marginal discrepancy in restorations fabricated with indirect impression when compared with direct impression (42 ±33 μm and 60 ±39 μm) (P<.001).
The results showed that conventional preparation with a modified shoulder margin presented improved marginal adaptation compared with modified preparation with flat cuspal reduction. Direct and indirect digital scanning techniques produced restorations within a clinically acceptable range; however, the indirect scanning technique resulted in the fabrication of restorations with superior marginal adaptation on the buccal location.
可能影响计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造(CAD-CAM)修复体边缘适应性的因素包括预备设计、印模技术和 CAD-CAM 系统。印模技术和预备设计对 CAD-CAM 局部覆盖修复体的影响尚未得到充分解决。
本体外研究的目的是调查直接和间接数字扫描技术以及 2 种预备设计对 CAD-CAM 嵌体边缘适应性的影响。
制作了 2 个近中-颊向颊面嵌体预备体,颊侧近中牙尖降低:改良肩台预备(MP),无肩台的颊侧牙尖平降;使用数字扫描仪(BlueCam;登士柏西诺德)从塑料牙(直接数字扫描)或从石膏代型(间接数字扫描)生成每个预备体的虚拟模型。使用 CAD-CAM 系统(CEREC 4.0;登士柏西诺德)设计嵌体,使用 CEREC MCX 铣床研磨纳米陶瓷树脂块(Lava Ultimate 修复体;3M ESPE)。使用光学立体显微镜在预备体边缘的 18 个位置以 ×25 放大率评估边缘差异。使用 3 因素方差分析和 Tukey HSD 检验(α=.05)对数据进行分析。
CP 的平均边缘适应性(59±50μm)显著低于 MP(69±58μm)(P<.001)。Tukey HSD 检验显示,与 CP 相比,MP 的近中和颊侧位置的边缘差异明显更大。关于印模技术,与直接印模相比,间接印模制作的修复体在颊侧位置的平均边缘差异最小(42±33μm 和 60±39μm)(P<.001)。
结果表明,与颊侧牙尖平降的改良预备相比,改良肩台预备的边缘适应性更好。直接和间接数字扫描技术制作的修复体在临床可接受的范围内;然而,间接扫描技术在颊侧位置制作的修复体具有更好的边缘适应性。