Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Department of Prosthodontics, Goethe University, Center for Dentistry and Oral Medicine (Carolinum), Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60596, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 7;11(1):14056. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-93425-z.
The aim of this study was to quantify and to compare the wear rates of premolar (PM) and molar (M) restorations of lithium disilicate ceramic (LS2) and an experimental CAD/CAM polymer (COMP) in cases of complex rehabilitations with changes in vertical dimension of occlusion (VDO). Twelve patients with severe tooth wear underwent prosthetic rehabilitation, restoring the VDO with antagonistic occlusal coverage restorations either out of LS2 (n = 6 patients, n = 16 posterior restorations/patient; N = 96 restorations/year) or COMP (n = 6 patients; n = 16 posterior restorations/patient; N = 96 restorations/year). Data was obtained by digitalization of plaster casts with a laboratory scanner at annual recalls (350 ± 86 days; 755 ± 92 days; 1102 ± 97 days). Each annual recall dataset of premolar and molar restorations (N = 192) was overlaid individually with the corresponding baseline dataset using an iterative best-fit method. Mean vertical loss of the occlusal contact areas (OCAs) was calculated for each restoration and recall time. For LS2 restorations, the mean wear rate per month over 1 year was 7.5 ± 3.4 μm (PM), 7.8 ± 2.0 μm (M), over 2 years 3.8 ± 1.6 µm (PM), 4.4 ± 1.5 µm (M), over 3 years 2.8 ± 1.3 µm (PM), 3.4 ± 1.7 µm (M). For COMP restorations, the mean wear rate per month over 1 year was 15.5 ± 8.9 μm (PM), 28.5 ± 20.2 μm (M), over 2 years 9.2 ± 5.9 µm (PM), 16.7 ± 14.9 µm (M), over 3 years 8.6 ± 5.3 µm (PM), 9.5 ± 8.0 µm (M). Three COMP restorations fractured after two years and therefore were not considered in the 3-year results. The wear rates in the LS2 group showed significant differences between premolars and molars restorations (p = 0.041; p = 0.023; p = 0.045). The wear rates in COMP group differed significantly between premolars and molars only in the first two years (p < 0.0001; p = 0.007). COMP restorations show much higher wear rates compared to LS2. The presented results suggest that with increasing time in situ, the monthly wear rates for both materials decreased over time. On the basis of this limited dataset, both LS2 and COMP restorations show reasonable clinical wear rates after 3 years follow-up. Wear of COMP restorations was higher, however prosthodontic treatment was less invasive. LS2 showed less wear, yet tooth preparation was necessary. Clinicians should balance well between necessary preparation invasiveness and long-term occlusal stability in patients with worn dentitions.
本研究的目的是定量比较并比较锂硅二硅酸盐陶瓷(LS2)和实验性 CAD/CAM 聚合物(COMP)在后牙修复中在垂直向颌位变化情况下的磨损率。12 名严重牙齿磨损的患者接受了修复治疗,通过对具有对抗性咬合覆盖修复体的义齿来恢复垂直向颌位,一种是 LS2(n=6 名患者,n=16 个后牙修复体/患者;N=96 个修复体/年),另一种是 COMP(n=6 名患者;n=16 个后牙修复体/患者;N=96 个修复体/年)。通过实验室扫描仪每年在石膏模型上数字化(350±86 天;755±92 天;1102±97 天)获得数据。每年的后牙修复体(N=192)数据集合分别与相应的基线数据集合使用迭代最佳拟合方法叠加。计算每个修复体和每次随访的咬合接触区(OCA)的平均垂直损失。对于 LS2 修复体,1 年内每月的平均磨损率为 7.5±3.4μm(前磨牙),7.8±2.0μm(磨牙);2 年内为 3.8±1.6μm(前磨牙),4.4±1.5μm(磨牙);3 年内为 2.8±1.3μm(前磨牙),3.4±1.7μm(磨牙)。对于 COMP 修复体,1 年内每月的平均磨损率为 15.5±8.9μm(前磨牙),28.5±20.2μm(磨牙);2 年内为 9.2±5.9μm(前磨牙),16.7±14.9μm(磨牙);3 年内为 8.6±5.3μm(前磨牙),9.5±8.0μm(磨牙)。3 年后,有 3 个 COMP 修复体发生断裂,因此未纳入 3 年结果。LS2 组的磨损率在前磨牙和磨牙修复体之间有显著差异(p=0.041;p=0.023;p=0.045)。COMP 组的磨损率在前磨牙和磨牙之间仅在前两年有显著差异(p<0.0001;p=0.007)。COMP 修复体的磨损率明显高于 LS2。研究结果表明,随着时间的推移,两种材料的月磨损率随时间的推移而降低。基于这个有限的数据集,LS2 和 COMP 修复体在 3 年随访后均显示出合理的临床磨损率。然而,COMP 修复体的牙体预备侵入性较小。LS2 的磨损率较低,但需要进行牙体预备。临床医生应该在具有磨损牙列的患者中在必要的预备侵入性和长期咬合稳定性之间取得良好的平衡。