Associate Professor, Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, Egypt.
Professor, Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Nov;124(5):565.e1-565.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.04.003. Epub 2020 Jul 4.
Demand is increasing for polyetheretherketone (PEEK) as a fixed dental prosthesis core material. However, information is lacking about how the precision of these restorations is affected by the fabrication procedures.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of different fabrication techniques on the marginal precision of PEEK single-crown copings.
A stainless-steel master die was designed to simulate a prepared mandibular second molar to receive ceramic crowns. Thirty PEEK copings were fabricated and divided into 3 groups (n=10) according to the fabrication technique: milled from a prefabricated PEEK blank by using a computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) system (PC); pressed from prefabricated PEEK pellets (PP); and pressed from PEEK granules (PG); in addition, 3-mol yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (3Y-TZP) copings (n=10) were produced by using the same CAD-CAM system and served as a control. Marginal precision measurements (in μm) were recorded at 4 reference points on each coping by using a digital microscope. The data obtained were statistically analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA and the pair-wise Tukey (HSD) test to study the difference between group mean values (α=.05).
The overall mean ±standard deviation marginal gap at the marginal opening for the copings was 78 ±10 μm for PEEK granules copings, 72 ±9 μm for PEEK pellet copings, 45 ±6 μm for PEEK CAD-CAM copings, and 43 ±1 μm for the 3Y-TZP CAD-CAM control. A statistically significant difference was found between the milled and pressed copings as indicated by the ANOVA test (P<.001). The pair-wise Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) test showed a nonsignificant difference (P>.05) between milled 3Y-TZP and milled PEEK copings; moreover, no significant difference was observed between the PEEK copings pressed from pellets or granules (P>.05).
The marginal precision of PEEK CAD-CAM-fabricated copings showed significantly lower mean marginal gap values than PEEK pressed copings. The marginal gap mean values recorded were all within a clinically acceptable range (120 μm).
聚醚醚酮(PEEK)作为固定义齿修复体的核心材料,其需求日益增加。然而,关于这些修复体的精度如何受到制作工艺影响的信息却很缺乏。
本体外研究的目的是评估不同制作技术对 PEEK 单冠修复体边缘精度的影响。
设计了一个不锈钢主模,以模拟一个接受陶瓷冠的预备下颌第二磨牙。制作了 30 个 PEEK 修复体,并根据制作技术分为 3 组(每组 10 个):使用计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造(CAD-CAM)系统从预制 PEEK 坯料铣削而成(PC);从预制 PEEK 颗粒压制而成(PG);从预制 PEEK 颗粒压制而成(PP);此外,还使用相同的 CAD-CAM 系统制作了 3 个氧化钇稳定四方氧化锆多晶(3Y-TZP)修复体(n=10)作为对照。使用数字显微镜在每个修复体的 4 个参考点记录边缘精度测量值(μm)。使用单因素方差分析和两两 Tukey(HSD)检验对组间均值进行统计学分析,以研究组间均值的差异(α=.05)。
修复体在边缘开口处的总体平均边缘间隙为 PEEK 颗粒压模修复体 78±10μm、PEEK 颗粒压模修复体 72±9μm、PEEK CAD-CAM 压模修复体 45±6μm、3Y-TZP CAD-CAM 对照修复体 43±1μm。方差分析(ANOVA)显示,铣削和压制修复体之间存在统计学差异(P<.001)。两两 Tukey 诚实显著差异(HSD)检验显示,铣削 3Y-TZP 与铣削 PEEK 修复体之间无显著差异(P>.05);此外,从颗粒或颗粒压制的 PEEK 修复体之间也没有观察到显著差异(P>.05)。
PEEK CAD-CAM 制作的修复体的边缘精度显示出比 PEEK 压制修复体更低的平均边缘间隙值。记录的边缘间隙平均值均在临床可接受范围内(120μm)。