Skip to main content
main-content

22.02.2021 | Original Article

Fit of monolithic multilayer zirconia fixed partial dentures fabricated by conventional versus digital impression: a clinical and laboratory investigations

Zeitschrift:
Clinical Oral Investigations
Autoren:
Noha Morsy, Mohammed El Kateb, Amir Azer, Said Fathalla
Wichtige Hinweise

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of conventional and digital impressions based on the fit of produced three-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) in vivo and the trueness and precision of both impression techniques.

Materials and methods

Twelve patients received a conventional polyether impression (group C, control, n=12) and a digital impression with CS3500 (group D, test, n=12) for each participant. Monolithic multilayer zirconia FPDs were fabricated, and the internal and marginal fit were assessed using the replica technique. Trueness and precision of both impression methods were assessed in vitro. A master model was used to create a reference scan. The master model received conventional impressions (group C, control, n=5) and digital impressions (group D, test, n=5). The virtual models of both groups were superimposed over the reference scan (5 superimpositions) using a three-dimensional (3D) processing software, and the 3D deviations were measured and averaged to obtain trueness value. For precision, the virtual models of each group were superimposed over each other (10 superimpositions) and the average deviation value was calculated. The data were analyzed using one-tailed Mann–Whitney U test at P ≤ 0.05.

Results

Group D resulted in a significantly better marginal and internal fit (30.91±15.15 and 30.86±13.57 μm for group D and 40.02±19.50 and 41.86±18.94 μm for group C). The mean values of trueness and precision for conventional and digital techniques were comparable (trueness: 62.8±5.45 and 62.72±12.01 μm and precision: 56.47±27 and 60.9±14.5 μm, respectively).

Conclusions

No significant difference was found between conventional and digital impressions in 3D datasets accuracy. In addition, both techniques resulted in FPDs with an acceptable clinical fit. However, the FPDs fabricated using the digital technique displayed better internal and marginal fit.

Clinical relevance

The applied impression technique as well as the computer-aided processing of the produced virtual models can significantly affect the fit of the final restoration. Direct digital impression is recommended over conventional impression for fabricating accurate monolithic zirconia 3-unit FPDs.

Trial registration

This clinical trial was retrospectively registered on August 11, 2020, in the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry database, and the number for the registry is PACTR202008685699453.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

★ PREMIUM-INHALT
e.Med Interdisziplinär

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag als Mediziner

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Weitere Produktempfehlungen anzeigen
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel
  1. Das kostenlose Testabonnement läuft nach 14 Tagen automatisch und formlos aus. Dieses Abonnement kann nur einmal getestet werden.

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Mail Icon II Newsletter

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

Bildnachweise