Graduate student, Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Research Institute, Institute of Translational Dental Sciences, BK21 PLUS Project, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Doctoral Researcher, Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Research Institute, Institute of Translational Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Feb;127(2):239-247. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.06.031. Epub 2020 Nov 24.
The fit and performance of prostheses fabricated using various computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems have been evaluated. However, most studies were conducted in vitro, and relatively few have addressed gingival parameters and prosthesis fit under clinical conditions.
This clinical study aimed to compare the fit of lithium disilicate crowns produced using 3 CAD-CAM systems and evaluate clinical results up to 6 months after delivery.
Forty participants requiring a single crown were recruited. Three monolithic lithium disilicate crowns were fabricated per participant by using 3 different CAD-CAM systems (intraoral scanners, CAD software, and milling machines): CEREC group (CEREC Bluecam, CEREC AC, CEREC MC); EZIS group (EZIS PO, EZIS VR, EZIS HM); and TRIOS group (TRIOS 3, EXO-CAD, ARUM-4X). The fit of the prostheses was assessed via a silicone replica technique, and the most acceptable crown was delivered; 12 were selected from the CEREC group, 16 from the EZIS group, and 12 from the TRIOS group. Follow-up clinical examinations were performed at 1, 3, and 6 months after delivery. The Kruskal-Wallis test with the post hoc Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to analyze significant differences in crown fit and periodontal conditions among the groups (α=.05).
The marginal gap of the CEREC group was significantly higher than that of the EZIS group, and the occlusal gap of the EZIS group was significantly lower than those of the CEREC and TRIOS groups (P<.05). Probing depth, bleeding index, and plaque index showed no intergroup differences at 6 months (P>.05).
The lithium disilicate crowns of all groups showed clinically acceptable fit. No significant differences were found among the groups in terms of periodontal conditions after 6 months.
已经评估了使用各种计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造（CAD-CAM）系统制造的假体的适配性和性能。然而，大多数研究都是在体外进行的，只有相对较少的研究涉及临床条件下的牙龈参数和假体适配性。
本临床研究旨在比较三种 CAD-CAM 系统制作的锂硅玻璃陶瓷冠的适配性，并评估交付后长达 6 个月的临床效果。
招募了 40 名需要单冠修复的参与者。每位参与者通过三种不同的 CAD-CAM 系统（口内扫描仪、CAD 软件和铣床）制作三个整体式锂硅玻璃陶瓷冠：CEREC 组（CEREC Bluecam、CEREC AC、CEREC MC）；EZIS 组（EZIS PO、EZIS VR、EZIS HM）；和 TRIOS 组（TRIOS 3、EXO-CAD、ARUM-4X）。通过硅橡胶印模技术评估假体的适配性，并交付最合适的冠。CEREC 组中选择了 12 个，EZIS 组中选择了 16 个，TRIOS 组中选择了 12 个。交付后 1、3 和 6 个月进行随访临床检查。采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验和事后 Mann-Whitney U 检验分析组间冠适配性和牙周状况的差异（α=.05）。
CEREC 组的边缘间隙显著高于 EZIS 组，而 EZIS 组的咬合间隙显著低于 CEREC 和 TRIOS 组（P<.05）。6 个月时，探诊深度、出血指数和菌斑指数在组间无差异（P>.05）。
所有组的锂硅玻璃陶瓷冠均具有临床可接受的适配性。6 个月后，组间牙周状况无显著差异。
Zotero 插件