ISSN : 0376-4672
Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal fit of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated form the conventional and the digital impression technique. Materials and methods : Ten patients were restored with monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression technique. Before definitive insertion, silicone replicas were produced from all twenty crowns. The silicone replicas were cut in three sections; each section was evaluated at two points. The measurement was carried out by using a measuring microscope (Olympus BX 51) and I-Solution. Data from the silicone replica scores were analyzed by Shapiro-Wilk test for normal distribution and the t-test for equality of two population’s mean. All tests were performed with -level of 0.05. Results : The average marginal gaps of monolithic zirconia restorations were 133.81 36.46 for the conventional impression technique, 90.07 9.47 for the digital impression technique. No statistical differences were found between the two impression techniques Conclusion : Both prostheses presented clinically acceptable results with comparing the marginal fit.
Piconi C, Maccauro G. Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial. Biomeaterials 1999;20:1-25
Koutayas SO, Vagkopoulou T, Pelekanos S, Koidis P, Strub JR. Zirconia in dentistry: part 2. Evidence-based clinical break-through. Eur J Esthet Dent 2009;4:348-80
Rinke S, Gersdorff N, Lange K, Roediger M. Prospective evaluation of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 7-year clinical results. Int J Prosthodont 2013;26:164-71
Albashaireh ZS, Ghazal M, Kern M. Two-body wear of different ceramic materials opposed to zirconia ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104:105-13
Filser F, Kocher P, Weibel F, LUthy H, Scharer P, Gauckler LJ. Reliability and strength of all-ceramic dental restorations fabricated by direct ceramic machining (DCM). Int J Comput Dent 2001;4:89-106
Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140:1301-4
Mormann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137(Suppl):7S-13S
Henkel GL. A comparison of fixed prostheses generated from conventional vs digitally scanned dental impressions. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2007;28:422-4, 426-8, 430-1
Schwartz IS. A review of methods and techniques to improve the fit of cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent1986;56:279-83
Felton DA, Kanoy BE, Bayne SC, Wirthman GP. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:357-64
Schwartz NL, Whitsett LD, Berry TG, Stewart JL. Unserviceable crowns and fixed partial dentures: life-span and causes for loss of serviceability. J Am Dent Assoc 1970;81:1395-401
Karlsson S. A clinical evaluation of fixed bridges, 10 years following insertion. J Oral Rehabil 1986;13:423-32
Reports of councils and bureaus: Revised american national standards institute/american dental association specification No. 8 for zinc phosphate cement. J Am Dent Assoc 1978;96:121-3
Sorensen SE, Larsen IB, Jorgensen KD. Gingival and alveolar bone reaction to marginal fit of subgingival crown margins. Scand J Dent Res 1986;94:109-14
Christensen GJ. Marginal fit of gold inlay castings. J Prosthet Dent 1966;16:297-305
Ostlund LE. Cavity design and mathematics: their effect on gaps at the margins of cast restorations. Oper Dent 1985;10:122-37
McLean JW. Polycarboxylate cements: five years' experience in general practice. Br Dent J 1972;132:9-15
Gulker I. Margins. N Y State Dent J 1985;51:213-5, 217
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
Sorensen JA. A standardized method for determination of crown margin fidelity. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:18-24
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
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
Molin M, Karlsson S. The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems: A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1993;51:201-6
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;35:116-22
Rahme HY, Tehini GE, Adib SM, Ardo AS, Rifai KT. In vitro evaluation of the "replica technique" in the measurement of the fit of Procera crowns. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008;9:25-32
Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:405-8
White SN, Yu Z, Kipnis V. Effect of seating force on film thickness of new adhesive luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:476-81
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
Kunii J, Hotta Y, Tamaki Y, Ozawa A, Kobayashi Y, Fujishima A, Miyazaki T, Fujiwara T. Effect of sintering on the marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia frameworks. Dent Mater J 2007;26:820-6
