Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 May;131(5):865-870. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.02.024. Epub 2022 May 5.
Implant-supported crowns made in both fully and partially digital workflows have been evaluated, but these studies have been mainly performed in vitro. Moreover, data on the comparison of clinical fitting and adjustment time for implant-supported crowns are limited.
The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical fit and adjustment time for implant-supported crowns produced by a partially and fully digital workflow in partially edentulous participants.
Twenty-eight participants who had received 2 adjacent implants in posterior sites were enrolled, each receiving 2 custom titanium abutments and a splinted monolithic zirconia restoration. Restorations of the control group (n=14) were produced from a digital scan and a cast-free digital workflow, while the restorations of the test group (n=14) were from a conventional impression and a partially digital workflow. A blinded investigator delivered the restorations. The clinical adjustment was performed incrementally, and a digital chronometer recorded the time required for the evaluation and adjustment at each step. An independent t test, Mann-Whitney U test, and the Fisher exact test were used to evaluate the results (α=.05).
The total mean adjustment time in the control group (12.49 minutes) was significantly longer than that of the test group (11.27 minutes) (P<.001). For the occlusal contact points, significantly less clinical adjustment time was required with the cast-free digital workflow (5.31 minutes) than with the model-based partially digital workflow (6.06 minutes) (P=.001). On other surfaces, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups (P>.05). All crowns could be successfully delivered after 2 clinical appointments (impression and delivery). Remakes were not necessary for any restorations in the test or control group.
The parameters of occlusal adjustment time and total adjustment time of the fully digital workflow were significantly shorter than those of the partially digital workflow.
已对全数字化和部分数字化流程制作的种植体支持的牙冠进行了评估，但这些研究主要在体外进行。此外，关于种植体支持的牙冠临床拟合和调整时间的比较数据有限。
本随机临床试验的目的是评估部分缺牙患者中使用部分数字化和全数字化工作流程制作的种植体支持牙冠的临床拟合和调整时间。
共纳入 28 名在后牙区植入 2 颗相邻种植体的患者，每位患者均植入 2 个定制钛基台和整体式氧化锆桥体修复体。对照组（n=14）的修复体由数字扫描和无模型数字化工作流程制作，而试验组（n=14）的修复体由传统印模和部分数字化工作流程制作。由一名盲法研究者进行修复体的临床调整。调整是逐步进行的，数字计时器记录每个步骤评估和调整所需的时间。采用独立 t 检验、Mann-Whitney U 检验和 Fisher 确切检验进行结果评估（α=.05）。
对照组（12.49 分钟）的总平均调整时间明显长于试验组（11.27 分钟）（P<.001）。对于牙合接触点，无模型数字化工作流程（5.31 分钟）所需的临床调整时间明显少于基于模型的部分数字化工作流程（6.06 分钟）（P=.001）。在其他表面，两组之间无显著差异（P>.05）。所有牙冠都可以在两次临床预约（印模和交付）后成功交付。试验组和对照组均无需对任何修复体进行返工。
全数字化工作流程的牙合调整时间和总调整时间参数明显短于部分数字化工作流程。
