Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations 11/2019

22.02.2019 | Original Article

Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression—a split-mouth randomised clinical study

verfasst von: Yasser Haddadi, Golnosh Bahrami, Flemming Isidor

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 11/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this prospective in vivo study was to evaluate the accuracy of the marginal and internal fit of crowns based on conventional impression (CI) or intraoral scan (IOS) in a randomised, split-mouth set-up.

Materials and methods

Nineteen patients needing full coverage crowns, fitting a split-mouth design, were provided with two lithium disilicate crowns: one based on a CI and one based on an IOS. The marginal and internal accuracy of the crowns were assessed with the replica technique and clinically using a modified California Dental Association (CDA) quality evaluation system.

Results

At the preparation margin, the median gap was 60 μm for IOS and 78 μm for CI. For the other points, the median gap ranged from 91 to 159 μm for IOS and 109 to 181 μm for CI. The accuracy of the IOS was statistically significantly better at all point except at the cusp tip. All crowns where rated R or S at both the 6- and 12-month follow-up appointments. The results for the clinical evaluation with CDA for marginal integrity showed no statistically significant difference between the two impression methods at both the 6- and 12-month evaluations.

Conclusions

Crowns based on IOS show statistically significantly better marginal and internal adaptation before cementation compared to conventional impression. However, the clinical evaluation showed similar marginal adaptation.

Clinical relevance

Crowns based on a fully digital workflow can provide clinically acceptable marginal adaptation, comparable to crowns based on CI.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y (2009) A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 28(1):44–56CrossRef Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y (2009) A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 28(1):44–56CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat van Noort R (2012) The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 28(1):3–12CrossRef van Noort R (2012) The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 28(1):3–12CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P (2016) Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 20(2):291–300CrossRef Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P (2016) Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 20(2):291–300CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA (2014) Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (intraoral scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(10):1113–1118CrossRef Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA (2014) Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (intraoral scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(10):1113–1118CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H (2014) Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health 14:10CrossRef Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H (2014) Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health 14:10CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Gjelvold B, Chrcanovic BR, Korduner EK, Collin-Bagewitz I, Kisch J (2016) Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial. J Prosthodont 25(4):282–287CrossRef Gjelvold B, Chrcanovic BR, Korduner EK, Collin-Bagewitz I, Kisch J (2016) Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial. J Prosthodont 25(4):282–287CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Schepke U, Meijer HJ, Kerdijk W, Cune MS (2015) Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: operating time and patient preference. J Prosthet Dent 114(3):403–406 e1CrossRef Schepke U, Meijer HJ, Kerdijk W, Cune MS (2015) Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: operating time and patient preference. J Prosthet Dent 114(3):403–406 e1CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Joda T, Bragger U (2016) Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 27(12):e185–e1e9CrossRef Joda T, Bragger U (2016) Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 27(12):e185–e1e9CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F (2018) Evaluation of operating time and patient perception using conventional impression taking and intraoral scanning for crown manufacture: a split-mouth, Randomized Clinical Study. Int J Prosthodont 31(31):55–59CrossRef Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F (2018) Evaluation of operating time and patient perception using conventional impression taking and intraoral scanning for crown manufacture: a split-mouth, Randomized Clinical Study. Int J Prosthodont 31(31):55–59CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Grasso JE, Nalbandian J, Sanford C, Bailit H (1985) Effect of restoration quality on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 53(1):14–19CrossRef Grasso JE, Nalbandian J, Sanford C, Bailit H (1985) Effect of restoration quality on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 53(1):14–19CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Jacobs MS, Windeler AS (1991) An investigation of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap. J Prosthet Dent 65(3):436–442CrossRef Jacobs MS, Windeler AS (1991) An investigation of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap. J Prosthet Dent 65(3):436–442CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Lang NP, Kiel RA, Anderhalden K (1983) Clinical and microbiological effects of subgingival restorations with overhanging or clinically perfect margins. J Clin Periodontol 10(6):563–578CrossRef Lang NP, Kiel RA, Anderhalden K (1983) Clinical and microbiological effects of subgingival restorations with overhanging or clinically perfect margins. J Clin Periodontol 10(6):563–578CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA (1971) The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 131(3):107–111CrossRef McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA (1971) The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 131(3):107–111CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wostmann B (2015) Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig 19(8):2027–2034CrossRef Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wostmann B (2015) Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig 19(8):2027–2034CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Berrendero S, Salido MP, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Pradies G (2016) Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Investig 20(9):2403–2410CrossRef Berrendero S, Salido MP, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Pradies G (2016) Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Investig 20(9):2403–2410CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Molin M, Karlsson S (1993) The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 51(4):201–206CrossRef Molin M, Karlsson S (1993) The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 51(4):201–206CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kastner K, Walter MH (2000) Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 84(4):419–424CrossRef Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kastner K, Walter MH (2000) Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 84(4):419–424CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD (1989) Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 62(4):405–408CrossRef Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD (1989) Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 62(4):405–408CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Zeltner M, Sailer I, Muhlemann S, Ozcan M, Hammerle CH, Benic GI (2017) Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent 117(3):354–362CrossRef Zeltner M, Sailer I, Muhlemann S, Ozcan M, Hammerle CH, Benic GI (2017) Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent 117(3):354–362CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, Lauer A (2017) Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: an in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent 118(1):36–42CrossRef Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, Lauer A (2017) Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: an in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent 118(1):36–42CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Uhm SH, Kim JH, Jiang HB, Woo CW, Chang M, Kim KN et al (2017) Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of four intraoral scanners with 70% reduced inlay and four-unit bridge models of international standard. Dent Mater J 36(1):27–34CrossRef Uhm SH, Kim JH, Jiang HB, Woo CW, Chang M, Kim KN et al (2017) Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of four intraoral scanners with 70% reduced inlay and four-unit bridge models of international standard. Dent Mater J 36(1):27–34CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Carbajal Mejia JB, Wakabayashi K, Nakamura T, Yatani H (2017) Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent 118(3):392–399CrossRef Carbajal Mejia JB, Wakabayashi K, Nakamura T, Yatani H (2017) Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent 118(3):392–399CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Rudolph H, Salmen H, Moldan M, Kuhn K, Sichwardt V, Wostmann B et al (2016) Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations. J Aappl Oral Sci 24(1):85–94CrossRef Rudolph H, Salmen H, Moldan M, Kuhn K, Sichwardt V, Wostmann B et al (2016) Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations. J Aappl Oral Sci 24(1):85–94CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Rodiger M, Heinitz A, Burgers R, Rinke S (2017) Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig 21(2):579–587CrossRef Rodiger M, Heinitz A, Burgers R, Rinke S (2017) Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig 21(2):579–587CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Sakornwimon N, Leevailoj C (2017) Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients' preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material. J Prosthet Dent 118(3):386–391CrossRef Sakornwimon N, Leevailoj C (2017) Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients' preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material. J Prosthet Dent 118(3):386–391CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Su TS, Sun J (2016) Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent 116(3):362–367CrossRef Su TS, Sun J (2016) Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent 116(3):362–367CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G (2008) Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns—validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil 35(2):116–122CrossRef Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G (2008) Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns—validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil 35(2):116–122CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression—a split-mouth randomised clinical study
verfasst von
Yasser Haddadi
Golnosh Bahrami
Flemming Isidor
Publikationsdatum
22.02.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 11/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-02840-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2019

Clinical Oral Investigations 11/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Zahnmedizin und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.