Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul Aydın University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Private Practice, Istanbul, Turkey.
Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Nov;24(11):4061-4068. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03278-5. Epub 2020 Jun 24.
The aim of this investigation was to compare clinical performance and in vitro wear of temporary CAD/CAM and cartridge crowns. This study is an approach to estimate the influence of in vivo use and laboratory simulation on temporary crowns.
A total of 90 crowns were fabricated from each temporary CAD/CAM or cartridge material. Also, 10 crowns of each material were clinically applied for 14 days, and 80 identical duplicate restorations were investigated in the laboratory after storage in water (14 days; 37 °C) and subsequent thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML, 240.000 × 50N ML, 600 × 5°C/55 °C). After in vivo application or in vitro aging, facture force, superficial wear (mean and maximum), surface roughness (Ra, Rz), thermal weight loss (TGA), and heat of reaction (DSC) were determined for all crowns.
Bonferroni post hoc test; one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); α = 0.05).
The fracture resistance of the temporary materials varied between 1196.4 (CAD in vivo) and 1598.3 N (cartridge crown in vitro). Mean (maximum) wear data between 204.7 (386.7 μm; cartridge in vitro) and 353.0 μm (621.8 μm; CAD in vitro) were found. Ra values ranged between 4.4 and 4.9 μm and Rz values between 36.0 and 40.8 μm. DSC and TG analysis revealed small differences between the materials but a strong influence of the aging process.
Comparison of in vivo and in vitro aging led to no significant differences in fracture force and wear but differences in roughness, DSC, and TGA. SEM evaluation confirmed comparability. Comparison of CAD/CAM and cartridge temporary materials partially showed significant differences.
In vitro aging methods might be helpful to estimate materials' properties before principal clinical application. CAD/CAM and cartridge temporary materials provided comparable good clinical performance.
本研究旨在比较临时 CAD/CAM 和筒式冠的临床性能和体外磨损。本研究旨在评估体内使用和实验室模拟对临时冠的影响。
从每种临时 CAD/CAM 或筒式材料中制作了 90 个牙冠。此外,每种材料的 10 个牙冠在临床应用 14 天后,将 80 个相同的复制品在水中储存 14 天后(37°C),然后进行热循环和机械加载(TCML,240000×50N ML,600×5°C/55°C)。在体内应用或体外老化后,对所有牙冠进行断裂力、表面浅层磨损(平均值和最大值)、表面粗糙度(Ra、Rz)、热失重(TGA)和热反应(DSC)的测定。
Bonferroni 事后检验;单向方差分析(ANOVA);α=0.05)。
临时材料的断裂阻力在 1196.4(体内 CAD)和 1598.3N(体外筒式冠)之间变化。发现的平均(最大)磨损数据在 204.7(386.7μm;体外筒式冠)和 353.0μm(621.8μm;体外 CAD)之间。Ra 值在 4.4 和 4.9μm 之间,Rz 值在 36.0 和 40.8μm 之间。DSC 和 TG 分析表明,材料之间存在微小差异,但老化过程的影响较大。
体内和体外老化的比较在断裂力和磨损方面没有显著差异,但在粗糙度、DSC 和 TGA 方面有差异。SEM 评估证实了可比较性。CAD/CAM 和筒式临时材料的比较部分显示出显著差异。
体外老化方法可能有助于在主要临床应用之前评估材料的性能。CAD/CAM 和筒式临时材料提供了相当好的临床性能。