Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Nov;30(11):1059-1066. doi: 10.1111/clr.13519. Epub 2019 Aug 20.
To compare the three-dimensional changes in quantity and morphology following clinical adjustment of a posterior single implant crown between chairside digital workflow (test) and hybrid digital workflow (control).
A total of 33 participants were included for single-tooth replacement with screw-retained crowns in posterior sites of either the maxillary or mandible. A total of 17 participants were carried to a chairside digital workflow, receiving monolithic lithium disilicate (LS2)-crowns (test), while the remaining 16 participants were fitted with CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia superstructures and hand-layered ceramic veneering crowns (control). As each crown underwent intraoral scanning (3Shape TRIOS Color, 3Shape), 3D digital models were rendered. These scans were taken both before and after try-in. Clinical adjustment dimensional changes were measured by superimposing the optical scans of models within a reverse software (Geomagic Control 2014). Adjustment counts and amounts (from vertical dimension) between two workflows were assessed and compared. Time consumption was recorded for efficiency analysis.
All patients were successfully treated in both groups. The median maximum vertical adjustment (taking both occlusal and interproximal surfaces into consideration) was 237 μm ± 112 in the test group and 485 μm ± 195 in the control group (p < .0001), respectively. The median adjustment count was 2.00 ± 1.09 in test group and 3.00 ± 1.05 in control group (p = .001), respectively. The total active working time/ total time for two workflows was 92.3/113.7 min for the test group and 146.3/676.3 min for the control group, respectively.
The test group showed fewer adjustments and apparent precision on the occlusal surface compared with the control group with only a fifth of the consumption of a hybrid workflow.
比较临床调整后后牙单种植体冠的三维数量和形态变化，分别采用椅旁数字化工作流程（试验组）和混合数字化工作流程（对照组）。
共纳入 33 名患者，在上下颌后牙区单牙缺失，行螺丝固位冠修复。17 名患者采用椅旁数字化工作流程，制作整体式二硅酸锂（LS2）冠（试验组），而其余 16 名患者采用 CAD/CAM 制作氧化锆桥体和手工分层陶瓷贴面冠（对照组）。当每个冠进行口内扫描（3Shape TRIOS Color，3Shape）时，生成 3D 数字模型。这些扫描在试戴前后均进行。通过在逆向软件（Geomagic Control 2014）中叠加模型的光学扫描来测量临床调整的尺寸变化。评估和比较两种工作流程之间的调整次数和数量（从垂直尺寸）。记录时间以进行效率分析。
两组患者均成功完成治疗。试验组的最大垂直调整中位数（同时考虑牙合面和邻面）为 237μm±112μm，对照组为 485μm±195μm（p<0.0001）。试验组的调整中位数为 2.00±1.09，对照组为 3.00±1.05（p=0.001）。试验组的总有效工作时间/总时间为 92.3/113.7min，对照组为 146.3/676.3min。
与混合数字化工作流程相比，试验组在牙合面调整次数更少，精度更高，消耗时间仅为其五分之一。
