J Adv Prosthodont.  2016 Dec;8(6):439-448. 10.4047/jap.2016.8.6.439.

Comparison of the fit accuracy of zirconia-based prostheses generated by two CAD/CAM systems

• Ha SJ
• Cho JH

• KMID: 2382589
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.6.439

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purposes of this study are to evaluate the internal and marginal adaptation of two widely used CAD/CAM systems and to study the effect of porcelain press veneering process on the prosthesis adaptation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Molar of a lower jaw typodont resin model was prepared by adjusting a 1.0 mm circumferential chamfer, an occlusal reduction of 2.0 mm, and a 5° convergence angle and was duplicated as an abrasion-resistant master die. The monolithic crowns and copings were fabricated with two different CAD/CAM system-Ceramil and Zirkonzahn systems. Two kinds of non-destructive analysis methods are used in this study. First, weight technique was used to determine the overall fitting accuracy. And, to evaluate internal and marginal fit of specific part, replica technique procedures were performed.
RESULTS
The silicone weight for the cement space of monolithic crowns and copings manufactured with Ceramil system was significantly higher than that from Zirkonzahn system. This gap might cause the differences in the silicone weight because the prostheses were manufactured according to the recommendation of each system. Marginal discrepancies of copings made with Ceramil system were between 106 and 117 µm and those from Zirkonzahn system were between 111 and 115 µm. Marginal discrepancies of copings made with Ceramil system were between 101 and 131 µm and those from Zirkonzahn system were between 116 and 131 µm.
CONCLUSION
Marginal discrepancy was relatively lower in Ceramil system and internal gap was smaller in Zirkonzahn system. There were significant differences in the internal gap of monolithic crown and coping among the 2 CAD/CAM systems. Marginal discrepancy produced from the 2 CAD/CAM systems were within a reported clinically acceptable range of marginal discrepancy.

Keyword

Fit accuracy; Weight technique; Replica technique; Press-over technique

MeSH Terms

Crowns
Dental Porcelain
Jaw
Molar
Prostheses and Implants*
Replica Techniques
Silicon
Silicones
Dental Porcelain
Silicon
Silicones

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Master die.

• 

  Fig. 2 (A) Scan of stone die, (B) Monolithic crown design, (C) Coping design, (D) Porcelain veneering form design, (E) Superposition of coping and porcelain veneering forms.

• 

  Fig. 3 (A) Silicone films representing the space between the abutment teeth and prosthesis, (B) Stabilized replica after segmentation in the bucco-lingual direction, (C) Measuring points of the cut silicone replica, (D) Microscopic crosssectional photograph of a replica showing the distances used to assess marginal accuracy.

• 

  Fig. 4 Silicone weights (mg). Initial: Before porcelain veneering, Final: After porcelain veneering.

• 

  Fig. 5 Internal and marginal gaps (µm) of monolithic crowns, simple copings and copings with porcelain veneering.

Reference

1. Hannink RHJ, Kelly PM, Muddle BC. Transformation toughening in zirconia-containing ceramics. J Am Ceram Soc. 2000; 83:461–487.

2. Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2007; 98:389–404.

3. Baig MR, Tan KB, Nicholls JI. Evaluation of the marginal fit of a zirconia ceramic computer-aided machined (CAM) crown system. J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 104:216–227.

4. 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.

5. Luthardt RG, Holzhüter M, Sandkuhl O, Herold V, Schnapp JD, Kuhlisch E, Walter M. Reliability and properties of ground Y-TZP-zirconia ceramics. J Dent Res. 2002; 81:487–491.

6. Martínez-Rus F, Suárez MJ, Rivera B, Pradíes G. Evaluation of the absolute marginal discrepancy of zirconia-based ceramic copings. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105:108–114.

7. Kohorst P, Junghanns J, Dittmer MP, Borchers L, Stiesch M. Different CAD/CAM-processing routes for zirconia restorations: influence on fitting accuracy. Clin Oral Investig. 2011; 15:527–536.

8. Tan K, Pjetursson BE, Lang NP, Chan ES. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004; 15:654–666.

9. Felton DA, Kanoy BE, Bayne SC, Wirthman GP. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 65:357–364.

10. Tinschert J, Natt G, Hassenpflug S, Spiekermann H. Status of current CAD/CAM technology in dental medicine. Int J Comput Dent. 2004; 7:25–45.

11. Molin MK, Karlsson SL, Kristiansen MS. Influence of film thickness on joint bend strength of a ceramic/resin composite joint. Dent Mater. 1996; 12:245–249.

12. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971; 131:107–111.

13. Boitelle P, Mawussi B, Tapie L, Fromentin O. A systematic review of CAD/CAM fit restoration evaluations. J Oral Rehabil. 2014; 41:853–874.

14. Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62:405–408.

15. Holmes JR, Sulik WD, Holland GA, Bayne SC. Marginal fit of castable ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 67:594–599.

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

17. Moldovan O, Luthardt RG, Corcodel N, Rudolph H. Three-dimensional fit of CAD/CAM-made zirconia copings. Dent Mater. 2011; 27:1273–1278.

18. Falk A, Vult von Steyern P, Fransson H, Thorén MM. Reliability of the impression replica technique. Int J Prosthodont. 2015; 28:179–180.

19. Trifković B, Budak I, Todorović A. Application of replicatechnique and SEM in accuracy measurement of ceramic crowns. Meas Sci Rev. 2012; 12:90–97.

20. Grenade C, Mainjot A, Vanheusden A. Fit of single tooth zirconia copings: comparison between various manufacturing processes. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105:249–255.

21. Subasi G, Ozturk N, Inan O, Bozogullari N. Evaluation of marginal fit of two all-ceramic copings with two finish lines. Eur J Dent. 2012; 6:163–168.

22. 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; 26:367–374.

23. Felton DA, Kanoy BE, Bayne SC, Wirthman GP. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 65:357–364.

24. 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; 113:174–179.

25. Souza RO, Özcan M, Pavanelli CA, Buso L, Lombardo GH, Michida SM, Mesquita AM, Bottino MA. Marginal and internal discrepancies related to margin design of ceramic crowns fabricated by a CAD/CAM system. J Prosthodont. 2012; 21:94–100.

26. Borba M, Cesar PF, Griggs JA, Della Bona Á. Adaptation of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Dent Mater. 2011; 27:1119–1126.

27. Ucar Y, Akova T, Akyil MS, Brantley WA. Internal fit evaluation of crowns prepared using a new dental crown fabrication technique: laser-sintered Co-Cr crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 102:253–259.

28. Pelekanos S, Koumanou M, Koutayas SO, Zinelis S, Eliades G. Micro-CT evaluation of the marginal fit of different In-Ceram alumina copings. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2009; 4:278–292.

29. Kokubo Y, Nagayama Y, Tsumita M, Ohkubo C, Fukushima S, Vult von Steyern P. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of In-Ceram crowns fabricated using the GN-I system. J Oral Rehabil. 2005; 32:753–758.

30. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971; 131:107–111.

31. Nakamura T, Dei N, Kojima T, Wakabayashi K. Marginal and internal fit of Cerec 3 CAD/CAM all-ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 2003; 16:244–248.

32. May KB, Russell MM, Razzoog ME, Lang BR. Precision of fit: the Procera AllCeram crown. J Prosthet Dent. 1998; 80:394–404.

33. Coli P, Karlsson S. Fit of a new pressure-sintered zirconium dioxide coping. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17:59–64.

34. Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G. Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns-validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil. 2008; 35:116–122.

35. Fransson B, Oilo G, Gjeitanger R. The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater. 1985; 1:197–199.

36. Boening KW, Walter MH, Reppel PD. Non-cast titanium restorations in fixed prosthodontics. J Oral Rehabil. 1992; 19:281–287.

37. Balkaya MC, Cinar A, Pamuk S. Influence of firing cycles on the margin distortion of 3 all-ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 93:346–355.

38. Gemalmaz D, Alkumru HN. Marginal fit changes during porcelain firing cycles. J Prosthet Dent. 1995; 73:49–54.

39. Castellani D, Baccetti T, Clauser C, Bernardini UD. Thermal distortion of different materials in crown construction. J Prosthet Dent. 1994; 72:360–366.

40. Hung SH, Hung KS, Eick JD, Chappell RP. Marginal fit of porcelain-fused-to-metal and two types of ceramic crown. J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 63:26–31.

41. Shearer B, Gough MB, Setchell DJ. Influence of marginal configuration and porcelain addition on the fit of In-Ceram crowns. Biomaterials. 1996; 17:1891–1895.

42. Song TJ. Marginal fit of the auro galvano crown system made using the electroforming technique. Seoul, Korea: Seoul National University;2004. Master thesis.

43. Torabi K, Vojdani M, Giti R, Taghva M, Pardis S. The effect of various veneering techniques on the marginal fit of zirconia copings. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015; 7:233–239.

44. Weaver JD, Johnson GH, Bales DJ. Marginal adaptation of castable ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 66:747–753.