Emine Göncü BAŞARAN, Emrah AYNA, Bülent Kadir TARTUK

Dijital ve Geleneksel Ölçü Yöntemi ile Hazırlanan Molar Kronların İnternal Doğruluklarının Değerlendirilmesi

Amaç: Bu in vitro çalışmanın amacı, dijital ve geleneksel ölçü yöntemi ile üretilen 3 farklı molar kronların internal aralıklarının hesaplanıp değerlerin karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Maksiller birinci molar olacak şekilde zirkonyum ana model olarak kullanıldı. Materyaller zirkonyum, polieter eter keton ve hibrit seramik olarak belirlendi, ana modelden 60 adet molar kron üretildi. Kron üretimi esnasında aynı veriler kullanıldı. Denekler 2 ana gruba ayrıldı: Geleneksel ölçü yöntemi için vinil Siloksan eter ölçü materyali kullanıldı (CZ; CP; CH, n=10). Dijital ölçü yöntemi için ise ağız içi tarayıcı sistemi kullanıldı (DZ; DP; DH, n=10). Elde edilen bütün kronların internal aralık değerlerinin hesaplanması için silikon replika tekniği kullanıldı. Gruplar arası istatistiksel farkları saptamak için ANOVA ve Tukey-HSD çoklu karşılaştırma testi kullanıldı. Bulgular: Dijital ve geleneksel ölçü yöntemleri istatistiksel olarak karşılaştırıldıklarında anlamlı fark gözlenmedi (p>0,05). En düşük internal aralık değer ortalaması DH (81,74 μm) grubunda gözlenirken, en yüksek değer CZ (102,2 μm) grubunda gözlendi. Sonuç: Sunmuş olduğumuz in vitro çalışma doğrultusunda dijital ölçü yöntemi ile üretilen kronların ile geleneksel ölçü yöntemi ile üretilen kronların internal uyumları arasında fark gözlenmedi (p>0,05). Dijital ve geleneksel ölçü yöntemi ile üretilen bütün örneklerin internal aralık değerleri klinik olarak kabul edilebilir aralık değerinde ölçüldü (

Evaluation of the Internal Accuracy of Molar Crowns Fabricated Using Digital and Conventional Impression Techniques

Objective: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the internal gaps of 3 different full molar crowns prepared using digital and conventional impression techniques. Materials and Methods: A zirconia model with a prepared maxillary first molar was used as the base model. Sixty crown restorations were produced using zirconia, polyether ether ketone and hybrid ceramic from the same datasets. The specimens divided into 2 groups that were fabricated as follows: for the group conventional impression (CZ; CP; CH, n=10), vinyl siloxane ether impressions of the master model were made. For the group digital impression (DZ; DP; DH, n=10), digital impressions of the master model using intraoral scanner system were made. The internal accuracy of the frameworks were measured under a reflected stereo microscope by using the silicon replica technique. ANOVA and the Tukey-HSD multiple comparison tests were used. Results: There was no significant statistical difference between the conventional and digital impression techniques in relation to the internal fit (p>0.05). Group DH (81.74 μm) showed the lowest values for internal fit, while group CZ (102.2 μm) showed the largest. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, it was concluded that the marginal fit produced by the digital and conventional impression techniques showed the same values, and all the samples were measured at a clinically acceptable internal fit (

PDF

___

Rekow ED. Dental CAD/CAM systems: a 20-year success story. J Am Dent Assoc 2006; 137(Suppl 1): 5-6.
Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 116: 362-7.
de Kok, Kleverlaan CJ, de Jager N, Kuijs R, Feilzer AJ. Mechanical performance of implant-supported posterior crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 1141: 59-66.
Lameira DP, Buarque e Silva WA, Andrade e Silva F, De Souza GM. Fracture strength of aged monolithic and bilayer zirconia-based crowns. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 418641.
Dirxen C, Blunck U, Preissner S. Clinical performance of a new biomimetic double network material. Open Dent J 2013; 6: 11822.
Stawarczyk B, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Jahn D, Sener B, Roos M, et al. Polyetheretherketone-a suitable material for fixed dental prostheses? J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2013; 101: 1209-16.
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.
McCabe JF, Carrick TE. Rheological properties of elastomers during setting. J Dent Res 1989; 68: 1218-22.
Abduo J, Lyons K, Swain M. Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37: 866-76.
Colpani JT, Borba M, Della Bona A. Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of ceramic crown copings. Dent Mater 2013; 29: 17480.
Martins LM, Lorenzoni FC, Melo AO, Silva LM, Oliveira JL, Oliveira PC, et al. Internal fit of two all-ceramic systems and metalceramic crowns. J Appl Oral Sci 2012; 20: 235-40.
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: 753-8.
Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D, Klein C, Cerny B, Brodesser J. Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. J Dent 2010; 38: 553-9.
Ueda K, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Erdelt K, Keul C, Güth JF. Fit of 4-unit FDPs from CoCr and zirconia after conventional and digital impressions. Clin Oral Investig 2016; 20: 283-9.
Yildiz C, Vanlioğlu BA, Evren B, Uludamar A, Ozkan YK. Marginalinternal adaptation and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM crown restorations. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 42-7.
Kohorst P, Brinkmann H, Li J, Borchers L, Stiesch M. Marginal accuracy of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses fabricated using different computer-aided manufacturing systems. Eur J Oral Sci 2009; 117: 319-25.
Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kästner K, Walter MH. Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 84: 419-24.
Suárez MJ, González de Villaumbrosia P, Pradíes G, Lozano JF. Comparison of the marginal fit of Procera AllCeram crowns with two finish lines. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16: 229-32.
Rubel BS. Impression materials: a comparative review of impression materials most commonly used in restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2007; 513: 629-42.
Hondrum SO. Changes in properties of nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials after storage of components. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 73-81.
Tamim H, Skjerven H, Ekfeldt A, Rønold HJ. Clinical evaluation of CAD/CAM metal-ceramic posterior crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions. Int J Prosthodont 2014; 27: 331-7.
Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109: 121-8.
Almeida e Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araújo É, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, et al. Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 515-23.
Wöstmann B, Rehmann P, Trost D, Balkenhol M. Effect of different retraction and impression techniques on the marginal fit of crowns. J Dent 2008; 36: 508-12.
Christensen GJ. The state of fixed prosthodontic impressions: room for improvement. J Am Dent Assoc 2005; 136: 343-6.
Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 114: 554-9.
Kim SY, Kim MJ, Han JS, Yeo IS, Lim YJ, Kwon HB. Accuracy of dies captured by an intraoral digital impression system using parallel confocal imaging. Int J Prosthodont 2013; 26: 161-3.
Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc 2009; 140: 1301-4.
Galhano GÁ, Pellizzer EP, Mazaro JV. Optical impression systems for CAD-CAM restorations. J Craniofac Surg 2012; 23: 575-9.
Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19: 2027-34.
Mörmann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc 2006; 137(Suppl): 7-13.