Digital versus conventional impressions for full-coverage restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of veneers generated by the guided prosthetic tooth preparation system

OBJECTIVE

This in vitro study aimed to assess and contrast the marginal and internal adaptation of all-ceramic prefabricated veneers manufactured via the FirstFit guided tooth preparation system against all-ceramic veneers produced using the chairside Computer-Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacture (CAD/CAM) system following identical guided preparation protocols.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two main groups were included, with 16 lithium disilicate veneers per group. Four typodonts were used for the test (FirstFit) and control CAD/CAM groups. Intraoral scans created master casts and preparation guides. Guides performed preparations on typodont teeth (two central incisors and two lateral incisors). Prepared teeth were scanned (CEREC Omnicam) to design and mill CAD/CAM veneers. Marginal gap thickness and cement space thickness were measured using light microscopy at four locations: marginal, cervical internal, middle internal, and incisal internal.

RESULTS

No significant difference existed between groups for marginal adaptation (p = 0.058) or incisal internal adaptation (p = 0.076). The control group had significantly lower values for middle internal adaptation (p = 0.023) and cervical internal adaptation (p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

Guided preparation evaluation showed no significant differences in marginal or incisal internal adaptation. The CAD/CAM group had significantly lower middle and cervical internal adaptation values.

Comparison between Conventional and Digital Impressions for Determining Axes and Distances of Three Implants in Straight and Curved Lines: An In Vitro Study

Background: In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of conventional and digital impressions on several parameters (inter-implant distance, intra-implant distance, inter-implant axis, and intra-implant axis) of three implants in curved lines and straight lines by using a laboratory scanner (LBS) versus an intra-oral scanner (IOS). Methods: Two 3D models were fabricated using a printer, each model with three internal hex implants analogues at the positions of 15#,16#,17# (straight line) and 12#,13#,14# (curved line). Standard intra-oral scan bodies (ISBs) were used, and the two models were scanned using 7 Series dental wings (LBS, reference model), followed by ten scans with Primescan (digital method). Standard Tessellation Language (STL) files were created. Five polyether impressions were taken from each model (straight and curved), and gypsum type 4 models were poured; each model was scanned five times to create a total of 25 STL files for each group (conventional method). The comparison between all the STL files (conventional and digital) was made by superimposition of the STL files on the STL reference model laboratory file using a 3D analyzing software. A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was performed, followed by Mann-Whitney tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. (p < 0.05). Results: For the conventional method, the mean errors were significantly higher for the curved line model (12-14) compared to the straight line model (15-17) for most parameters (p < 0.05). For the digital method, the mean errors were significantly higher for the curved-line model (12-14) compared to the straight line model (15-17) in half of the parameters (p < 0.05). Within the curved line model (12-14) and the straight line model (15-17), the mean errors between the conventional method and the digital method were not significant for most variables. Conclusions: The difference between curved lines and straight lines has an impact on the mean error of the conventional method. Both methods are reliable for straight and curved lines in partially dentate situations.

Marginal and internal fit of five-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses fabricated with digital scans and conventional impressions: A comparative in vitro study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the marginal and internal fit of five-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated using digital scans and conventional impressions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine master models with three zirconia abutments were scanned with an intraoral scanner (test group), and nine conventional impressions (control group) of these same models were also made. The stone casts from these impressions were scanned with a laboratory extraoral scanner (D700, 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). A total of 18 five-unit zirconia-based FDP frameworks (test group, n = 9; control group, n = 9) were manufactured. Marginal and internal fit (in μm) were evaluated using the replica method under micro-computed tomography. Analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare continuous variables across two groups. A level of p < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.

RESULTS

The mean ± standard deviation of the marginal fit was 95.03 ± 12.74 μm in the test group and 106.02 ± 14.51 μm in the control group. The lowest marginal mean value was observed in the test group, with a statistically significant difference compared to the control group (F = 14.56, p < 0.05). The mean ± standard deviation of the internal fit was 103.61 ± 9.32 and 106.38 ± 7.64 μm, respectively, in the test and control groups, with no statistically significant difference (F = 1.56, p > 0.05). The mean values of both groups were clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The five-unit zirconia-based FDPs fabricated with digital scans showed better fit than those in the conventional impression group. Within the limitations of this study, these results are encouraging, and continued progress in the digital field should allow for more accurate long-span restorations.

Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of single crowns manufactured with an analog workflow and three CAD-CAM systems: A prospective clinical study

PURPOSE

This prospective clinical study evaluated and compared the marginal and internal fit of crowns fabricated with an analog workflow and three different computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five participants in need of a single complete-coverage molar or premolar crown were recruited in the study. Twenty-two completed the study, and three participants dropped out. Teeth were prepared according to a standardized protocol by one operator. For each participant, one final impression was made with polyether material (PP) and three intraoral scanners: CEREC Omnicam (C), Planmeca Planscan (PM), and True Definition (TR). For the PP group, crowns were fabricated with a pressable lithium disilicate ceramic, whereas for the other three groups (C, PM, and TR), crowns were designed and milled with dedicated CAD-CAM systems and materials. Marginal (vertical and horizontal) and internal discrepancies between the crowns and tooth preparation were measured at various locations with digital superimposition software. Data was analyzed for normality with Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests and then compared with one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

RESULTS

Mean vertical marginal gap values were 92.18 ± 141.41 μm (PP), 150.12 ± 138.06 μm (C), 129.07 ± 109.96 μm (PM), and 135.09 ± 112.03 μm (TR). PP group had statistically significantly smaller vertical marginal discrepancy (p = 0.001) than all other groups, whereas no significant difference was detected among the three CAD-CAM systems (C, PM, and TR). Horizontal marginal discrepancies were 104.93 ± 111.96 μm (PP), 89.49 ± 119.66 μm (C), 113.36 ± 128.49 μm (PM), and 136.39 ± 142.52 μm (TR). A significant difference was detected only between C and TR (p < 0.0001). Values for the internal fit were 128.40 ± 49.31μm (PP), 190.70 ± 69.79μm (C), 146.30 ± 57.70 μm (PM), and 168.20 ± 86.67 μm (TR). The PP group had a statistically significant smaller internal discrepancy than C (p < 0.0001) and TR groups (p = 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found compared to the PM group.

CONCLUSION

Posterior crowns fabricated with CAD-CAM systems showed vertical margin discrepancy greater than 120 μm. Only crowns fabricated with the conventional methodology had vertical margins below 100 μm. Horizontal marginal discrepancy was different among all groups, and only CEREC CAD-CAM was below 100 μm. Internal discrepancy was less for crowns fabricated with an analog workflow.

Accuracy of Computerized Optical Impression Making in Fabrication of Removable Dentures for Partially Edentulous Jaws: An In Vivo Feasibility Study

The use of computerized optical impression making (COIM) for the fabrication of removable dentures for partially edentulous jaws is a rising trend in dental prosthetics. However, the accuracy of this method compared with that of traditional impression-making techniques remains uncertain. We therefore decided to evaluate the accuracy of COIM in the context of partially edentulous jaws in an in vivo setting. Twelve partially edentulous patients with different Kennedy classes underwent both a conventional impression (CI) and a computerized optical impression (COI) procedure. The CI was then digitized and compared with the COI data using 3D analysis software. Four different comparison situations were assessed: Whole Jaw (WJ), Mucosa with Residual Teeth (M_RT), Isolated Mucosa (IM), and Isolated Abutment Teeth (AT). Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate group differences by quantifying the deviation values between the CIs and COIs. The mean deviations between the COIs and CIs varied significantly across the different comparison situations, with mucosal areas showing higher deviations than dental hard tissue. However, no statistically significant difference was found between the maxilla and mandible. Although COIM offers a no-pressure impression method that captures surfaces without irritation, it was found to capture mucosa less accurately than dental hard tissue. This discrepancy can likely be attributed to software algorithms that automatically filter out mobile tissues. Clinically, these findings suggest that caution is required when using COIM for prosthetics involving mucosal tissues as deviations could compromise the fit and longevity of the prosthetic appliance. Further research is warranted to assess the clinical relevance of these deviations.

Clinical outcomes of implant-supported and tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital versus analogue impression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the clinical outcomes of implant-supported prostheses and tooth-supported fixed prostheses, fabricated from digital and conventional impression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The literature search was carried out on two electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from January 2011 to September 2022 were included. The bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Further screening was done for meta-analysis according to modified Newcastle-Ottawa scoring criteria. Forest plot was generated using a statistical method of inverse variance of random effect with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

A total of 8 randomized controlled trials were included for systematic review out of which four studies were based on tooth-supported fixed prosthesis and remaining four were based on implant-supported prosthesis. Further screening was conducted and three studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Tooth-supported fixed prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed no significant difference in the marginal fit in any region measured, except for occlusal region where conventional impression showed more favorable marginal fit. Implant-supported prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed survival rates ranging from 97.3 to 100% and there was no statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss (p = 0.14).

CONCLUSION

Implant-supported prostheses fabricated from digital and conventional impressions show no significant differences in their clinical outcomes. Tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital impression have shown favorable findings in terms of marginal fit. Despite that, there is still lack of clinical trials with larger sample size and longer follow-up periods. Future studies that fulfill these two criteria are deemed necessary.

Effect of translucency of CAD-CAM ceramic restorative materials and scanning aid conditions on the accuracy of intraoral scans

Background/purpose

Subsurface scattering from translucent material would affect the digital scans. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of translucency of ceramic restorative materials and scanning aid conditions on the accuracy of intraoral scans.

Materials and methods

Identical anatomic contour crowns with ten ceramic restorative materials were fabricated: five zirconia, three lithium disilicate glass-ceramic, and two leucite reinforced glass-ceramic. The models with ceramic crowns were digitized with an intraoral scanner (IOS) and analyzed for accuracy (n = 10) with and without a scanning aid. Scan time efficiency was recorded. Square-shaped specimens with 1.0-mm thickness were fabricated with the same materials, and translucency parameter (TP) values were measured. One-way ANOVA, Welch ANOVA, and a post-hoc pairwise comparison or independent t-test were used for trueness and time analysis, and the F-test was used to examine the precision (α = 0.05). Pearson correlation test was conducted.

Results

Significant differences were revealed for trueness with no scanning aid condition and for TP values (P < 0.05). In contrast, no statistically significant differences were observed for trueness with a scanning aid. A strong correlation (r = 0.854, P < 0.01) between TP value and trueness with no scanning aid was revealed. By applying a scanning aid, trueness was improved and scan time efficiency significantly increased (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The translucency of ceramic restorative materials negatively affects the accuracy of IOS scan without a scanning aid; however, the scan accuracy and time efficiency of IOS scanning for ceramic restorations can be improved by applying scanning aid, and prostheses with high quality without unnecessary labor can be produced.

Trueness of full-arch dental models obtained by digital and conventional impression techniques: an in vivo study

The aim of this study was to compare the trueness of complete- and partial-arch impressions obtained using conventional impression materials and intraoral scanners in vivo. Full-arch impressions were taken using polyether and polyvinylsiloxane. Gypsum casts were digitized using a laboratory scanner (IM, AF). Casts obtained from polyether impressions were also scanned using an industrial blue light scanner to construct 3D reference models. Intraoral scanning was performed using CEREC Omnicam (CO) and Trios 3 (TR). Surface matching software (Atos Professional) enabled to determine the mean deviations (mean distances) from the reference casts. Statistically significant discrepancies were calculated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The mean distance for trueness ranged from 0.005 mm (TR) to 0.023 mm (IM) for the full arch, from 0.001 mm (CO) to 0.068 mm (IM) for the anterior segment, and from 0.019 mm (AF) to 0.042 mm (IM) for the posterior segment. Comparing the anterior vs. the posterior segment, significantly less deviations were observed for anterior with CO (p < 0.001) and TR (p < 0.001). Full-arch comparisons revealed significant differences between AF vs. IM (p = 0.014), IM vs. CO (p = 0.002), and IM vs. TR (p = 0.001). Full-arch trueness was comparable when using Affinis and the two intraoral scanners CEREC Omnicam and Trios 3. The digital impression devices yielded higher local deviations within the complete arch. Digital impressions of the complete arch are a suitable and reliable alternative to conventional impressions. However, they should be used with caution in the posterior region.Trial registration: Registration number at the German Clinical Trial Register (04.02.2022): DRKS00027988 ( https://trialsearch.who.int/ ).

Evaluation of marginal/internal fit of fixed dental prostheses after digital, conventional, and combination impression techniques: A systematic review

Advances of digital technology are rapidly adopted in dental practice. This systematic review aimed to collect evidence on the accuracy of fit of different types of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated through digital, conventional, or combination impression techniques. Data collection was based on the guidelines of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). Two databases (PubMed, Scopus) were searched for articles in English published between 2010 and 2021 resulting in 480 articles. Of those, 35 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These articles referred to three groups of materials/techniques including all-ceramic (zirconia; lithium disilicate) and porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) restorations. Results showed clinically acceptable marginal fit (< 120 μm) for all materials and impression techniques. Α fully digital workflow appears more promising for the construction of short-span zirconia FDPs. Nevertheless, most articles evaluated marginal/internal fit of single crowns or short-span FDPs in vitro, while clinical data are limited for long-span FDPs. The necessity for gingival retraction remains a major drawback of all impression techniques, increasing procedural time and patient discomfort. Besides, factors related to the fabrication process, including milling and 3D printing of working models significantly influence the outcome. Overall, there still some way to go before digital technology can be incorporated in complex treatment plans in prosthodontics.

Implant-supported removable partial dentures compared to conventional dentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications

Objectives

The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to compare implant‐supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) with distal extension removable partial dentures (DERPDs) in terms of patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs: patients' quality of life and satisfaction) and to determine mechanical and biological complications associated with ISRPDs.

Material and Methods

An electronic search was performed on four databases to identify studies treating Kennedy class I or II edentulous patients and which compared ISRPDs with DERPDs in terms of PROMS and studies, which evaluated mechanical and biological complications associated ISRPDs. Two authors independently extracted data on quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications from these studies. The risk of bias was assessed for each study, and for PROMs, the authors performed a meta‐analysis by using a random‐effects model.

Results

Thirteen articles were included based on the selection criteria. The difference in mean scores for quality of life (30.5 ± 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.9–36.1) and patient satisfaction (−20.8 ± 0.2; 95% CI, −23.7 to −17.8) between treatments with conventional and implant‐supported removable dentures was statistically significant (p < .05). Implant‐supported removable dentures improved patients' overall quality of life and satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications, such as clasp adjustment, abutment or implant loosening, marginal bone resorption, and peri‐implant mucositis, were noted in ISRPDs during patient follow‐up. Studies assessing PROMs were very heterogeneous (I² = 65%, p = .85; I² = 75%, p = .88).

Conclusions

ISRPDs significantly improved quality of life and patient satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications have been associated with ISRPDs treatment, requiring regular monitoring of patients to avoid the occurrence of these complications.

Comparative assessment of complete-coverage, fixed tooth-supported prostheses fabricated from digital scans or conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Intraoral scanners have significantly improved over the last decade. Nevertheless, data comparing intraoral digital scans with conventional impressions are sparse.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the impact of impression technique (digital scans versus conventional impressions) on the clinical time, patient comfort, and marginal fit of tooth-supported prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The authors conducted a literature search based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework in 3 databases to identify clinical trials with no language or date restrictions. The mean clinical time, patient comfort, and marginal fit values of each study were independently extracted by 2 review authors and categorized according to the scanning or impression method. The authors assessed the study-level risk of bias.

RESULTS

A total of 16 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The mean clinical time was statistically similar for digital scan procedures (784 ±252 seconds) and for conventional impression methods (1125 ±159 seconds) (P>.05). The digital scan techniques were more comfortable for patients than conventional impressions; the mean visual analog scale score was 67.8 ±21.7 for digital scans and 39.6 ±9.3 for conventional impressions (P<.05). The mean marginal fit was 80.9 ±31.9 μm and 92.1 ±35.4 μm for digital scan and conventional impressions, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital scan techniques are comparable with conventional impressions in terms of clinical time and marginal fit but are more comfortable for patients than conventional impression techniques.

Digital scanning under rubber dam: An innovative method for making definitive impressions in fixed prosthodontics

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive protocol for final impressions making under rubber dam isolation by using an intraoral scanner.

CLINICAL CONSIDERATION

Impression making after tooth preparation with rubber dam isolation are impossible with conventional physical impressions, which are not with intraoral scanners. Digital technologies have disrupted dentistry in the last decades, bringing new, straightforward, and more time-efficient protocols for dental practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Taking in consideration the beneficial properties of scanning under rubber dam this protocol can be highly recommended for everyday use for making definitive intraoral scans for tooth-supported restorations.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The described protocol offers the possibility to make a final impression in a stress-free environment, without blood or saliva, to obtain a better visualization and scanning of the finish line, and the potential of save time on definitive impression making.

Accuracy of three digital scanning methods for complete-arch tooth preparation: An in vitro comparison

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The accuracy of digital scanning for complete dental arch and implant-supported complete-arch restorations has been reported. However, research addressing the accuracy of digital scanning methods for complete-arch tooth preparation is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of intraoral scanning, impression scanning, and cast scanning for complete-arch preparation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Maxillary and mandibular jaw typodonts with 28 teeth prepared for complete crowns were used as reference casts and digitized as reference data sets with a desktop scanner. Three digital scanning methods were applied. First, the reference casts were each scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner to generate the intraoral scanning group data sets. Second, the reference casts were each captured 10 times by using polyvinyl siloxane impression material, and the impressions were scanned with a desktop scanner to generate the impression scanning group data sets. Third, the impressions obtained in the impression scanning group were used to make gypsum casts which were then digitized with a desktop scanner to generate the cast scanning group data sets. Accuracy was determined by trueness and precision. Three-dimensional deviations of the prepared arches and anterior and posterior segments were measured from root mean square values and depicted on color-difference maps. Differences among test groups were analyzed by using a 1-way ANOVA and the post hoc Bonferroni test for normally distributed data or the Kruskal-Wallis test with Bonferroni correction for non-normally distributed data (α=.05).

RESULTS

The trueness of the maxillary arch was significantly higher in the impression scanning group than in the cast scanning and intraoral scanning groups (P<.05), but no significant differences were found among the 3 groups of the mandibular arch (P>.05). The precision of both arches was significantly higher in the impression scanning and intraoral scanning groups than in the cast scanning group (P<.05). Color maps showed horizontal symmetrical displacement in the intraoral scanning group relative to the reference data sets and within-group unilateral distal-end distortion. Irregular arch deformations were noted in the impression scanning group, and buccal and occlusal expansion occurred in the anterior-posterior direction in the cast scanning group. Pooled data for anterior teeth indicated that the trueness was lowest in the intraoral scanning group; however, that for the maxillary anterior teeth did not differ, while that for the mandibular anterior teeth differed significantly among groups (P<.05). For the posterior teeth, deviation was the lowest in the impression scanning group, and significant differences were noted in both arches among the 3 groups (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Of the methods tested, impression scanning was the most accurate for the creation of a digital cast of a complete prepared arch.

Influence of intraoral scanning on the quality of preparations for all-ceramic single crowns

Objectives

To evaluate the influence of intraoral scanning on the quality of preparations for all-ceramic single crowns.

Material and methods

A total of 690 randomly selected and anonymized in vivo single crown preparations were examined. Three hundred twenty-three preparations were directly recorded with an intraoral scanner (group IS). Data from plaster casts digitized by a laboratory scanner (group ID; N = 367) served as control. Comparisons included convergence angle, marginal design, marginal substance reduction, homogeneity of the finish line, and undercuts. Evaluation was performed using fully automated specialized software. Data were analyzed applying Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher’s exact test. Level of significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Convergence angle was above optimum in both groups, but significantly larger for group IS (p < 0.001). Marginal design was more ideal in group IS concerning the absence of featheredge design (p < 0.001) and reverse bevel (p = 0.211). Marginal substance reduction was closer to prerequisites for all-ceramic restorations in group IS (p < 0.001). Finish lines were more homogeneous in group IS regarding the uniformity of their course (p < 0.001). Undercuts were more frequently found in group ID than in group IS (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Intraoral scanning of prepared teeth has positive impact on the quality of preparations for all-ceramic single crowns regarding marginal substance reduction, marginal design, homogeneity of the finish line, and undercuts.

Clinical relevance

Accurate preparation design represents a fundamental condition for success of ceramic crowns. Since there is potential for optimization, intraoral scanning might enhance preparation quality providing instant visual feedback.

A Digital Esthetic Rehabilitation of a Patient with Dentinogenesis Imperfecta Type II: A Clinical Report

A 19‐year‐old female affected by dentinogenesis imperfecta type II (DI‐II), a genetic disease that affects the structural integrity of the dentin, presented with a chief complaint of discolored teeth. For this patient, digital techniques, including digital smile design (DSD), the ARCUSdigma axiograph and computer‐aided design/computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM), were extensively used in all phases of the rehabilitation process. Compared to traditional analog methods, these digital techniques could reduce the constant confirmation of occlusion, promote communication between clinicians and dental technicians, achieve accurate occlusion with relatively high efficiency, and improve the efficacy of esthetic rehabilitation in the treatment of this patient with DI‐II.

Marginal and internal fit of full ceramic crowns milled using CADCAM systems on cadaver full arch scans

Background

Chairside systems are becoming more popular for fabricating full-ceramic single restorations, but there is very little knowledge about the effect of the entire workflow process on restoration fit. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the absolute marginal discrepancy (AMD) and the full internal fit (FULL) of all-ceramic crowns made by two chairside systems, Planmeca FIT and CEREC, with detailed and standard mill settings.

Methods

One upper molar was prepared for an all-ceramic crown in human cadaver maxilla. Full-arch scans were made by Emerald or Omnicam four times each. Twenty-four e.max crowns were designed and milled by the Planmill 30s or 40s or CEREC MCXL mills with either detailed or standard settings. The cadaver tooth was extracted, and each crown was fixed on it and scanned by a high-resolution microCT scanner. The AMD and FULL were measured digitally in mesio-distal and bucco-lingual 2D slices. The actual and predicted times of the milling were also registered.

Results

No differences were observed between detailed or standard settings in either system. The AMD was significantly higher with CEREC (132 ± 12 μm) than with either Planmill 30s (71 ± 6.9 μm) or 40s (78 ± 7.7 μm). In standard mode, the FULL was significantly higher with CEREC (224 ± 9.6 μm) than with either Planmill 30s (169 ± 8.1 μm) or 40s (178 ± 8.5 μm). There was no difference between actual and predicted time with the two Planmeca models, but with CEREC, the actual time was significantly higher than the predicted time. The 30s had significantly higher actual and predicted times compared to all other models. Across all models, the average milling time was 7.2 min less in standard mode than in detailed mode.

Conclusions

All fit parameters were in an acceptable range. No differences in fit between Planmeca models suggest no effect of spindle number on accuracy. The detailed setting has no improvement in the marginal or internal fit of the restoration, yet it increases milling time.

Clinical acceptance of single-unit crowns and its association with impression and tissue displacement techniques: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The definitive impression for a single-unit crown involves many material and technique factors that may affect the success of the crown.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this prospective cohort study was to determine whether impression technique (tray selection), impression material, or tissue displacement technique are associated with the clinical acceptability of the crown (CAC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network documented details of the preparation, impression, and delivery of 3730 consecutive single-unit crowns. Mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate associations between impression techniques and materials and the CAC and to assess associations between the presence of a subgingival margin with the displacement technique and the outcome variables CAC and number of impressions required.

RESULTS

Of the 3730 crowns, 3589 (96.2%) were deemed clinically acceptable. A significant difference in the CAC was found with different impression techniques (P<.001) and different impression materials (P<.001). The percentage of the CAC for digital scans was 99.5%, 95.8% for dual-arch trays, 95.2% for quadrant trays, and 94.0% for complete-arch impression trays. Although no statistically significant difference was found in the CAC produced with dual-arch trays without both mesial and distal contacts, crowns fabricated under these conditions were less likely to achieve excellent occlusion. The percentage of the CAC for digital scans was 99.5%, 97.0% for polyether impressions, 95.5% for polyvinyl siloxane impressions, and 90.5% for other impression materials. Accounting for the location of the margin, the use of a dual-cord displacement technique was significantly associated with lower rates of requiring more than 1 impression (P=.015, odds ratio=1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-arch trays produced clinically acceptable crowns; however, if the prepared tooth was unbounded, the occlusal fit was more likely to have been compromised. Digital scans produced a slightly higher rate of CAC than conventional impression materials. The use of a dual-cord technique was associated with a decreased need to remake impressions when the margins were subgingival.

Systematic review versus structured critical analysis

Objective: This analysis discusses common problems with systematic reviews (SRs) and presents a novel solution, the structured critical analysis (SCA) that can be incorporated into a SR or used as an alternative literature review design.Methods: A cross-sectional survey of current SRs related to interdisciplinary restorative dentistry was obtained by evaluating 100 current SRs for their self-reported methodological quality and its effect on scientific validity.Results: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocol (PRISMA) was used in 99/100 SRs, but only 8/100 reported a low risk of bias. High statistical heterogeneity precluding meta-analysis was found in 44/100 SRs. Only 94 paragraphs/100 SRs provided critical analysis.Discussion: Significant problems were found with current SRs that can compromise their reliability as the premier level of evidence for clinical science research. The reader must be aware of these deficiencies to correctly interpret the SR and cannot rely on the format alone.

Production tolerance of conventional and digital workflow in the manufacturing of glass ceramic crowns

OBJECTIVES

To measure and compare the size of the cement gap of wax and polymer copings and final glass-ceramic crowns, produced from conventional and digital workflows, one additive and one subtractive.

METHODS

Thirty wax copings were made by conventional manual layering technique and modeling wax on stone models with spacer varnish simulating a cement spacer. The wax copings were embedded and press-cast in lithium disilicate glass ceramic. Thirty wax copings were produced by milling from a wax blank, i.e. subtractive manufacturing, and thirty polymer burn-out copings were produced by stereolithography, i.e. additive manufacturing. These copings were embedded and press-cast in lithium disilicate glass ceramic in the same manner as the conventional group. The fit of the wax/polymer copings and subsequent crowns was checked using an impression replica method. Mean values for cement gap for marginal, axial, and occlusal areas were calculated and differences were analyzed using Student's t-test.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in mean values for accuracy/production tolerance among different manufacturing techniques for both production stages: wax and polymer copings and final pressed glass-ceramic crowns. In general, crowns produced from a digital additive workflow showed smaller mean cement gaps than crowns produced from a conventional workflow or a digital subtractive workflow. Additive polymer copings showed significantly smaller cement gaps than milled wax copings (p≤.001) and conventional wax copings (p≤.001) in the axial area. In the occlusal area, both additive polymer copings and conventional wax copings showed significantly smaller cement gaps than milled wax copings (p=.002 and p≤.001 respectively). Crowns produced from conventional manual build-up wax copings showed significantly larger mean cement gaps than crowns produced from milled wax and additively manufactured polymer copings in the marginal and axial areas (p≤.001). Among the crowns with smaller cement gaps, crowns produced from additively manufactured polymer copings showed significantly smaller mean cement gaps than crowns produced from milled wax in the marginal and axial areas (p≤.001). In the occlusal areas, the differences in mean cement gaps were only statistically significant between crowns produced from conventional manual build-up wax copings and crowns produced from milled wax where the latter ones showed smaller mean cement gaps (p=.025).

SIGNIFICANCE

The present study suggests that an additive manufacturing technique produces smaller mean cement gaps in glass-ceramic crowns than a conventional or subtractive manufacturing technique.