Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Autor: Chochlidakis KM; Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. Electronic address: kchochlidakis@URMC.Rochester.edu., Papaspyridakos P; Assistant Professor, Division of Postgraduate Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass., Geminiani A; Private practice, Rochester, NY., Chen CJ; Instructor, Department of Dentistry, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan., Feng IJ; Assistant Research Fellow, Department of Medical Research, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan., Ercoli C; Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: The Journal of prosthetic dentistry [J Prosthet Dent] 2016 Aug; Vol. 116 (2), pp. 184-190.e12. Date of Electronic Publication: 2016 Mar 02.
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.017
Abstrakt: Statement of Problem: Limited evidence is available for the marginal and internal fit of fixed dental restorations fabricated with digital impressions compared with those fabricated with conventional impressions.
Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to compare marginal and internal fit of fixed dental restorations fabricated with digital techniques to those fabricated using conventional impression techniques and to determine the effect of different variables on the accuracy of fit.
Material and Methods: Medline, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were electronically searched and enriched by hand searches. Studies evaluating the fit of fixed dental restorations fabricated with digital and conventional impression techniques were identified. Pooled data were statistically analyzed, and factors affecting the accuracy of fit were identified, and their impact on accuracy of fit outcomes were assessed.
Results: Dental restorations fabricated with digital impression techniques exhibited similar marginal misfit to those fabricated with conventional impression techniques (P>.05). Both marginal and internal discrepancies were greater for stone die casts, whereas digital dies produced restorations with the smallest discrepancies (P<.05). When a digital impression was used to generate stereolithographic (SLA)/polyurethane dies, misfit values were intermediate. The fabrication technique, the type of restoration, and the impression material had no effect on misfit values (P>.05), whereas die and restoration materials were statistically associated (P<.05).
Conclusions: Although conclusions were based mainly on in vitro studies, the digital impression technique provided better marginal and internal fit of fixed restorations than conventional techniques did.
(Copyright © 2016 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: