Comparison of Marginal and Internal Fit of Different CAD/CAM Copings

Recep Kara^1,

¹Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Aydın University, Istanbul, Turkey

Cite this paper:
Recep Kara. Comparison of Marginal and Internal Fit of Different CAD/CAM Copings. International Journal of Dental Sciences and Research. 2020; 8(4):105-111. doi: 10.12691/ijdsr-8-4-6

Abstract

This study compared the internal and marginal gap between CAD/CAM copings to determine the clinical acceptability. Hundred dental stone duplications of a metal major maxillary molar die were fabricated and separated into five. All copings were produced by milling and laser sintering method in the form of twenty groups. At x 180 magnification, marginal and internal gaps of each coping were measured at 75 points, and a total of 7500 measurements were performed for six regions on digital photographs taken with video microscope. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc test (Tukey and Bonferroni). The internal and marginal gaps of the milling group were significantly larger than the laser sintering group (P < 0.05). The results of this in vitro study show that CAD/CAM milled Co-Cr copings exhibit larger marginal and internal gap values than copings by laser sintering method. All copings were presented clinically acceptable marginal and internal accuracy. Milling and laser sintering systems are suitable for manufacturing of copings.

Keywords:
computer-aided design dental marginal adaptation dental crown

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Figures

References:

[1]	Andersson M, Carlsson L, Persson M, et al. Accuracy of machine milling and spark erosion with a CAD/CAM system. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 76: 187-193.
[2]	Martinez-Rus F, Ferreiroa A, Ozcan M, et al. Marginal Discrepancy of Monolithic and Veneered All-Ceramic Crowns on Titanium and Zirconia Implant Abutments Before and After Adhesive Cementation: A Scanning Electron Microscopy Analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013; 28: 480-487.
[3]	Valderhaug J, Heløe LA. Oral Hygiene in a Group of Supervised Patients with Fixed Prostheses. J Periodontol 1977; 48: 221-224.
[4]	Kamada K, Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Effect of ceramic surface treatments on the bond of four resin luting agents to a ceramic material. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79: 508-513.
[5]	Fransson B, Øilo G, Gjeitanger R. The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1985; 1: 197-199.
[6]	Ushiwata O. Toolmakers’ microscope. J Sci Instrum 1940; 17: 119-120.
[7]	Nawafleh NA, Mack F, Evans J, et al. Accuracy and reliability of methods to measure marginal adaptation of crowns and FDPs: A literature review. J Prosthodont 2013; 22: 419-428.
[8]	Ayad MF. Effects of tooth preparation burs and luting cement types on the marginal fit of extracoronal restorations. J Prosthodont 2009; 18: 145-151.
[9]	Kim KB, Kim WC, Kim HY, et al. An evaluation of marginal fit of three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated by direct metal laser sintering system. Dent Mater; 29. Epub ahead of print July 2013.
[10]	Contrepois M, Soenen A, Bartala M, et al. Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 110: 447-454.e10.
[11]	Grenade C, Mainjot A, Vanheusden A. Fit of single tooth zirconia copings: comparison between various manufacturing processes. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105: 249-255.
[12]	Kunii J, Hotta Y, Tamaki Y, et al. Effect of sintering on the marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia frameworks. Dent Mater J 2007; 26: 820-826.
[13]	Hey J, Beuer F, Bensel T, et al. Single crowns with CAD/CAM-fabricated copings from titanium: 6-year clinical results. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112: 150-154.
[14]	Tschernitschek H, Borchers L, Geurtsen W. Nonalloyed titanium as a bioinert metal—A review. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96: 12.
[15]	Takahashi J, Kimura H, Lautenschlager EP, et al. Casting Pure Titanium into Commercial Phosphate-bonded SiO2 Investment Molds. J Dent Res 1990; 69: 1800-1805.
[16]	Da Rocha SS, Adabo GL, Ribeiro RF, et al. Internal adaptation of cast titanium crowns. J Appl Oral Sci 2007; 15: 247-252.
[17]	Könönen M, Kivilahti J. Fusing of dental ceramics to titanium. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 848-854.
[18]	Farjood E, Vojdani M, Torabi K, et al. Marginal and internal fit of metal copings fabricated with rapid prototyping and conventional waxing. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117: 164-170.
[19]	Blackman R, Baez R, Barghi N. Marginal accuracy and geometry of cast titanium copings. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67: 435-440.
[20]	Örtorp A, Jönsson D, Mouhsen A, et al. The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: A comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 356-363.
[21]	Almeida e Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, et al. Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 515-523.
[22]	Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: An overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008; 204: 505-511.
[23]	Anunmana C, Charoenchitt M, Asvanund C. Gap comparison between single crown and three-unit bridge zirconia substructures. J Adv Prosthodont 2014; 6: 253-258.
[24]	Bindl A, Mörmann WH. Marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic CAD/CAM crown-copings on chamfer preparations. J Oral Rehabil 2005; 32: 441-447.
[25]	Song TJ, Kwon TK, Yang JH, et al. Marginal fit of anterior 3-unit fixed partial zirconia restorations using different CAD/CAM systems. J Adv Prosthodont 2013; 5: 219-225.
[26]	Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98: 389-404.
[27]	May KB, Russell MM, Razzoog ME, et al. Precision of fit: the Procera AllCeram crown. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 80: 394-404.
[28]	Park JK, Lee WS, Kim HY, et al. Accuracy evaluation of metal copings fabricated by computer-aided milling and direct metal laser sintering systems. J Adv Prosthodont 2015; 7: 122-128.
[29]	Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 116: 362-367.
[30]	Hung SH, Hung KS, Eick JD, et al. Marginal fit of porcelain-fused-to-metal and two types of ceramic crown. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 63: 26-31.
[31]	Schaefer O, Kuepper H, Thompson GA, et al. Effect of CNC-milling on the marginal and internal fit of dental ceramics: A pilot study. Dent Mater 2013; 29: 851-858.
[32]	Rudolph H, Luthardt RG, Walter MH. Computer-aided analysis of the influence of digitizing and surfacing on the accuracy in dental CAD/CAM technology. Comput Biol Med 2007; 37: 579-587.
[33]	Mously HA, Finkelman M, Zandparsa R, et al. Marginal and internal adaptation of ceramic crown restorations fabricated with CAD/CAM technology and the heat-press technique. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112: 249-256.
[34]	Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, et al. A review of dental CAD/CAM: Current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dental Materials Journal 2009; 28: 44-56.