Özal Çise, Ulusoy Mutahhar
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Near East University, Nicosia, Turkey.
J Adv Prosthodont. 2021 Dec;13(6):373-384. doi: 10.4047/jap.2021.13.6.373. Epub 2021 Dec 22.
This study aimed to compare the marginal and internal fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations that were designed by using the data obtained with the aid of intraoral and laboratory scanners.
For the fabrication of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations using impressions taken from the maxillary master cast, plaster cast was created and scanned in laboratory scanners (InEos X5 and D900L). The main cast was also scanned with different intraoral scanners (Omnicam [OMNI], Primescan [PS], Trios 3 [T3], Trios 4 [T4]) (n = 12 per group). Zirconia fixed partial dentures were virtually designed, produced from presintered block, and subsequently sintered. Marginal and internal discrepancy values (in µm) were measured by using silicone replica method under stereomicroscope. Data were statistically analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis tests (<.05).
In terms of marginal adaptation, the measurements on the canine tooth indicated better performance with intraoral scanners than those in laboratory scanners, but there was no difference among intraoral scanners (<.05). In the premolar tooth, PS had the lowest marginal (86.9 ± 19.2 µm) and axial (92.4 ± 14.8 µm), and T4 had the lowest axio-occlusal (89.4 ± 15.6 µm) and occlusal (89.1 ± 13.9 µm) discrepancy value. In both canine and premolar teeth, the D900L was found to be the most marginally and internally inconsistent scanner.
Within the limits of the study, marginal and internal discrepancy values were generally lower in intraoral scanners than in laboratory scanners. Marginal discrepancy values of scanners were clinically acceptable (< 120 µm), except D900L.
本研究旨在比较借助口内扫描仪和实验室扫描仪获取的数据设计的3单位整体式氧化锆修复体的边缘适合性和内部适合性。
为使用从上颌主模型制取的印模制作3单位整体式氧化锆修复体，制作石膏模型并在实验室扫描仪（InEos X5和D900L）中进行扫描。主模型也使用不同的口内扫描仪（Omnicam [OMNI]、Primescan [PS]、Trios 3 [T3]、Trios 4 [T4]）进行扫描（每组n = 12）。虚拟设计氧化锆固定局部义齿，由预烧结块制作，随后进行烧结。在立体显微镜下使用硅橡胶复制法测量边缘和内部差异值（单位：µm）。数据采用单因素方差分析和Kruskal Wallis检验进行统计学分析（<.05）。
在边缘适应性方面，犬齿上的测量结果表明，口内扫描仪的性能优于实验室扫描仪，但口内扫描仪之间无差异（<.05）。在前磨牙上，PS的边缘差异值最低（86.9 ± 19.2 µm），轴向差异值最低（92.4 ± 14.8 µm），T4的轴合面差异值最低（89.4 ± 15.6 µm），咬合差异值最低（89.1 ± 13.9 µm）。在犬齿和前磨牙上，D900L被发现是边缘和内部一致性最差的扫描仪。
在本研究的范围内，口内扫描仪的边缘和内部差异值通常低于实验室扫描仪。除D900L外，扫描仪的边缘差异值在临床上是可接受的（< 120 µm）。
