Sarhan Moamen Mohsen, Rady Nermeen Abd Elsalam, Khamis Mohamed Moataz
Assistant Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Damanhour University, Damanhour, Egypt; and PhD student, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Dec 24. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.11.009.
The accuracy of the interproximal and occlusal contacts of single posterior implant-supported restorations designed using computer-aided design (CAD) software programs remains uncertain.
The aim of this clinical study was to assess the interproximal and occlusal contacts of single posterior implant-supported restorations designed with 2 distinct dental CAD software programs.
Forty single posterior implant-supported restorations were evaluated for interproximal and occlusal contacts. Restorations were designed with 2 CAD software programs (exocad and Dental System) by using the same digital scan and milled with the same milling machine and material. Two study groups were formed according to the CAD software program used (n=20). Dental floss, 12-µm shimstock, the OccluSense device, and the Medit occlusion analyzer app were used to evaluate the interproximal, static, and dynamic occlusal contacts. The Shapiro-Wilk normality test was used, and the Z-test was used to compare the results (α=.05).
The interproximal and static occlusal contacts were statistically more accurate when using the Dental System 3Shape software program than the exocad software program (P<.05). No statistically significant difference in the dynamic occlusal contact was found between the 2 studied groups (P=.147).
The accuracy of interproximal and occlusal contacts of single posterior implant-supported restorations differed depending on the CAD software program used. The Dental System 3Shape software program demonstrated more accurate interproximal and static occlusal contacts than the exocad software program.
使用计算机辅助设计（CAD）软件程序设计的单个后牙种植体支持修复体的邻面和咬合接触的准确性仍不确定。
本临床研究的目的是评估使用两种不同牙科CAD软件程序设计的单个后牙种植体支持修复体的邻面和咬合接触。
对40个单个后牙种植体支持修复体的邻面和咬合接触进行评估。使用相同的数字扫描，通过两种CAD软件程序（exocad和牙科系统）设计修复体，并使用相同的铣床和材料进行铣削。根据所使用的CAD软件程序形成两个研究组（n = 20）。使用牙线、12μm的薄垫片、OccluSense设备和Medit咬合分析仪应用程序来评估邻面、静态和动态咬合接触。使用Shapiro-Wilk正态性检验，并使用Z检验比较结果（α = 0.05）。
使用牙科系统3Shape软件程序时，邻面和静态咬合接触在统计学上比exocad软件程序更准确（P < 0.05）。在两个研究组之间，动态咬合接触未发现统计学上的显著差异（P = 0.147）。
单个后牙种植体支持修复体的邻面和咬合接触的准确性因所使用的CAD软件程序而异。牙科系统3Shape软件程序显示出比exocad软件程序更准确的邻面和静态咬合接触。
