Effect of varying levels of expertise on the reliability and reproducibility of the digital waxing of single crowns: A preliminary in vitro study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The digital waxing of single crowns can be affected by the quality of intraoral scans and use of computer-aided design (CAD) software programs. However, clinical outcomes of the resulting crowns are also affected by computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) methodologies. Studies on the effect of different levels of expertise on digital waxing are lacking. PURPOSE The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the impact of different levels of expertise on the reliability and reproducibility of margin outlining during digital waxing. MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty analogs of implant stock abutments (Ø4.8×4 mm) were embedded into resin blocks. To simulate different clinical situations, abutments were divided into 3 groups: 10 abutments (group GOS) received artificial gingiva and were scanned with an open system intraoral scanner, while 10 abutments with (group GIS) and 10 abutments without artificial gingiva (group IS) were scanned with an intraoral scanner within an integrated CAD-CAM system. All resulting standard tessellation language (STL) files were used by 2 different observers (an experienced CAD professional and a clinician with basic CAD knowledge) to digitally design a left mandibular central incisor in the same software program. All resulting digital crown designs were exported to STL files to assess crown margin accuracy at the coupling interface by superimposition with the control STL file of the scan body designed for the same abutment by the manufacturer. For this purpose, a CAD software program was used to automatically calculate median, minimum, and maximum deviations of margins in millimeters. Statistically significant pairwise differences among groups and between observers were assessed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (α=.05). RESULTS For the CAD professional, median deviations between designed crown STL files and the control STL of the scan body were 0.08 mm (range: 0.04 to 0.15) for group GOS; 0.10 mm (range: 0.06 to 0.18) for group GIS; and 0.05 mm (range: 0.03 to 0.08) for group IS. For the clinician, median deviations were 0.08 mm (range: 0.04 to 0.12) for group GOS; 0.11 mm (range: 0.07 to 0.17) for group GIS; and 0.05 mm (range: 0.04 to 0.11) for group IS. There were no significant differences between observers (P>.05). However, statistically significant differences were found between group IS and the other 2 groups (P=.001) but not between groups GOS and GIS (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS The present findings suggest that a digital wax pattern made with a dental CAD software program is not affected by varying levels of expertise but might be affected by subgingival margins.