Evaluation of the marginal fit of three margin designs of resin composite crowns using CAD/CAM.

OBJECTIVES To examine the marginal fit of resin composite crowns manufactured with the CEREC 3 system employing three different margin designs; bevel, chamfer and shoulder, by means of a replica technique and a luting agent. METHODS Three master casts were fabricated from an impression of a typodont molar tooth and a full-coverage crown prepared with a marginal finish of a bevel, a chamfer and a shoulder. Each cast was replicated 10 times (n=10). Scanning of the replicas and crown designing was performed using the CEREC Scan system. The crowns were milled from Paradigm MZ100 composite resin blocks. The marginal fit of the crowns was evaluated with a replica technique (Aquasil LV, Dentsply), and with a resin composite cement (RelyX Unicem, Aplicap) and measured with a travelling microscope. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA. RESULTS For the replica technique the average marginal gaps recorded were: Bevel Group 105+/-34 microm, Chamfer Group 94+/-27 microm and Shoulder Group 91+/-22 microm. For the resin composite cement the average marginal gaps were: Bevel Group 102+/-28 microm, Chamfer Group 91+/-11 microm and Shoulder Group 77+/-8 microm. Two-way ANOVA analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups of finishing lines regardless of the cementation technique used. CONCLUSIONS The marginal gap of resin composite crowns manufactured with the CEREC 3 system is within the range of clinical acceptance, regardless of the finishing line prepared or the cementation technique used.

[1]  N M Jedynakiewicz,et al.  CEREC: science, research, and clinical application. , 2001, Compendium of continuing education in dentistry.

[2]  T Sato,et al.  A comparison of the marginal fit of three cast ceramic crown systems. , 1988, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[3]  H Spiekermann,et al.  Marginal fit of alumina-and zirconia-based fixed partial dentures produced by a CAD/CAM system. , 2001, Operative dentistry.

[4]  M. Markley.  Restorations of silver amalgam. , 1951, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[5]  S. Bayne,et al.  Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. , 1989, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[6]  R. P. Rusin.  Properties and applications of a new composite block for CAD/CAM. , 2001, Compendium of continuing education in dentistry.

[7]  G J Christensen,et al.  Clinical and research advancements in cast-gold restorations. , 1971, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[8]  F. Barbakow,et al.  Chairside computer-aided direct ceramic inlays. , 1989, Quintessence international.

[9]  M. Peters,et al.  Minimally invasive operative care. I. Minimal intervention and concepts for minimally invasive cavity preparations. , 2001, The journal of adhesive dentistry.

[10]  J. Strub,et al.  Evaluation of the marginal accuracy of different all-ceramic crown systems after simulation in the artificial mouth. , 1999, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[11]  F. M. Gardner,et al.  Margins of complete crowns--literature review. , 1982, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[12]  R. Hickel,et al.  New direct restorative materials. FDI Commission Project. , 1998, International dental journal.

[13]  K F Leinfelder,et al.  Three-year clinical evaluation of CAD/CAM restorations. , 1992, Journal of esthetic dentistry.

[14]  G Oilo,et al.  The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. , 1985, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[15]  S. Toreskog.  The minimally invasive and aesthetic bonded porcelain technique. , 2002, International dental journal.

[16]  W H Mörmann,et al.  Full-ceramic CAD/CIM anterior crowns and copings. , 1999, International journal of computerized dentistry.

[17]  B Reiss,et al.  Clinical long-term results and 10-year Kaplan-Meier analysis of Cerec restorations. , 2000, International journal of computerized dentistry.

[18]  Kazumichi Wakabayashi,et al.  Marginal and internal fit of Cerec 3 CAD/CAM all-ceramic crowns. , 2003, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[19]  H Denissen,et al.  Marginal fit and short-term clinical performance of porcelain-veneered CICERO, CEREC, and Procera onlays. , 2000, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[20]  B Van Meerbeek,et al.  Marginal accuracy of CAD/CAM inlays made with the original and the updated software. , 1992, Journal of dentistry.

[21]  B. G. Dale,et al.  Esthetic Dentistry: A Clinical Approach to Techniques and Materials , 2001 .

[22]  C. Murdoch-Kinch,et al.  Minimally invasive dentistry. , 2003, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[23]  G Freedman.  Ultraconservative dentistry. , 1998, Dental clinics of North America.

[24]  G. Willems,et al.  Clinical and semiquantitative marginal analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years. , 1995, E -journal of dentistry.

[25]  R. Hickel,et al.  [New direct restorative materials]. , 1998, Nederlands tijdschrift voor tandheelkunde.

[26]  J. Mclean,et al.  The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique , 1971, British Dental Journal.

[27]  M. Molin,et al.  The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study. , 1993, Acta odontologica Scandinavica.

[28]  J Chai,et al.  A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress, and Procera crowns. , 1997, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[29]  Rusin Rp.  Properties and applications of a new composite block for CAD/CAM. , 2001 .