J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2010 Jan;48(1):1-7. 10.4047/jkap.2010.48.1.1.

Marginal fidelity of zirconia core using MAD/MAM system

• Kang DR
• Shim JS
• Moon HS
• Lee KW

• KMID: 2000315
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2010.48.1.1

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the fit of zirconia core using MAD/MAM system comparing to that of conventional metal-ceramic and CAD/CAM system.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Duplicating the prepared resin tooth, 50 improved stone dies were fabricated. These dies are classified as a group of 5 to create the core. The groups were composed of metal-ceramic, Cercon(R), Ceramill(R), Rainbow(TM), and Zirkonzhan(R). Each core was cemented to stone die, and then, absolute marginal discrepancy was measured with microscope at a magnification of x50. Statistical analysis was done with one-way ANOVA test and Tukey's HSD test.
RESULTS
The mean absolute marginal discrepancy for metal-ceramic was 51.97 +/- 23.38 micrometer, for Cercon(R) was 62.16 +/- 25.88 micrometer, for Ceramill(R) was 67.64 +/- 40.38 micrometer, for Rainbow(TM) was 125.07 +/- 42.19 micrometer, and for Zirkonzhan(R) was 105 +/- 44.61 micrometer.
CONCLUSION
1. Fit of margin was identified as in the order of metal-ceramic, Cercon(R), Ceramill(R), Zirkonzhan(R), and Rainbow(TM). 2. Absolute marginal discrepancy of the zirconia core that designed by MAD/MAM system had significant differences in order of Ceramill(R), Zirkonzhan(R), and Rainbow(TM). 3. The mean absolute marginal discrepancy between Cercon(R) and Ceramill(R) did not show significant differences.

Keyword

Zirconia; core; MAD/MAM; Marginal discrepancy

MeSH Terms

Tooth
Zirconium
Zirconium

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Observation of marginal discrepancy using microscope (magnification × 50). C, core; D, die.

• 

  Fig. 2. Means and standard deviation of marginal gap in each system (unit : μ m).

• 

  Fig. 3. Casting misfit terminology - cited from the study of Holmes et al. (1989).

Reference

1.Seghi RR., Sorensen JA. Relative flexural strength of six new ceramic materials. Int J Prosthodont. 1995. 8:239–46.

2.Tinschert J., Natt G., Mautsch W., Spiekermann H., Anusavice KJ. Marginal fit of alumina-and zirconia-based fixed partial dentures produced by a CAD/CAM system. Oper Dent. 2001. 26:367–74.

3.Yang JH., Yeo YS., Lee SH., Han JS., Lee JB. Marginal fit of Celay/In-ceram, conventional In-ceram and Empress 2 All-ceramic single crowns. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2002. 40:131–9.

4.Rekow ED. High-technology innovations—and limitations—for restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 1993. 37:513–24.

5.Reich S., Wichmann M., Nkenke E., Proeschel P. Clinical fit of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures, generated with three different CAD/CAM systems. Eur J Oral Sci. 2005. 113:174–9.

6.Gardner FM. Margins of complete crowns—literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 1982. 48:396–400.

7.Kim DK., Cho IH., Lim JH., Lim HS. On the marginal fidelity of all-ceramic core using CAD/CAM system. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2003. 41:20–34.

8.Holmes JR., Bayne SC., Holland GA., Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989. 62:405–8.

9.Carter JM., Sorensen SE., Johnson RR., Teitelbaum RL., Levine MS. Punch shear testing of extracted vital and endodontically treated teeth. J Biomech. 1983. 16:841–8.

10.Strawn SE., White JM., Marshall GW., Gee L., Goodis HE., Marshall SJ. Spectroscopic changes in human dentine exposed to various storage solutions-short term. J Dent. 1996. 24:417–23.

11.Sorensen JA. A standardized method for determination of crown margin fidelity. J Prosthet Dent. 1990. 64:18–24.

12.Leong D., Chai J., Lautenschlager E., Gilbert J. Marginal fit of machine-milled titanium and cast titanium single crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 1994. 7:440–7.

13.Moon BH., Yang JH., Lee SH., Chung HY. A study on the marginal fit of all-ceramic crown using ccd camera. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 1998. 36:273–92.

14.Groten M., Axmann D,Pro ¨bster L., Weber H. Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in-vitro testing. J Prosthet Dent. 2000. 83:40–9.

15.Gassino G., Barone Monfrin S., Scanu M., Spina G., Preti G. Marginal adaptation of fixed prosthodontics: a new in vitro 360-degree external examination procedure. Int J Prosthodont. 2004. 17:218–23.

16.Christensen GJ. Marginal fit of gold inlay castings. J Prosthet Dent. 1966. 16:297–305.

17.Palomo F., Peden J. Periodontal considerations of restorative procedures. J Prosthet Dent. 1976. 36:387–94.

18.Molin MK., Karlsson SL., Kristiansen MS. Influence of film thickness on joint bend strength of a ceramic/resin composite joint. Dent Mater. 1996. 12:245–9.

19.McLean JW., von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971. 131:107–11.

20.Kydd WL., Nicholls JI., Harrington G., Freeman M. Marginal leakage of cast gold crowns luted with zinc phosphate cement: an in vivo study. J Prosthet Dent. 1996. 75:9–13.

21.Sulaiman F., Chai J., Jameson LM., Wozniak WT. A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress, and Procera crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 1997. 10:478–84.

22.Shin HS., Kim SG. Comparison of marginal fit before and after porcelain build-up of two kinds of CAD/CAM zirconia all-ceramic restorations. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2008. 46:529–34.

23.Denissen H., Dozic ′A., van der Zel J., van Waas M. Marginal fit and short-term clinical performance of porcelain-veneered CICERO, CEREC, and Procera onlays. J Prosthet Dent. 2000. 84:506–13.

24.Valderrama S., Van Roekel N., Andersson M., Goodacre CJ., Munoz CA. A comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of titanium and gold-platinum-palladium metal ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 1995. 8:29–37.