| Abstrakt: |
The aim of this study was to compare the fit of feldspathic ceramic crowns fabricated via 3 different extraoral digitizing methods. Twelve maxillary first premolars were prepared and 36 single crowns were fabricated via 3 extraoral digitizing methods using a laboratory scanner (n = 12): (1) scanning the typodont (ST [control] group); (2) scanning the impression (SI group); (3) scanning the stone cast (SC group). Micro-computed tomography was used to calculate two-dimensional marginal-internal gap and the three-dimensional volumetric gap between the crowns and their corresponding dies. The measured gaps were divided into 6 location categories as follows: marginal gap (MG), finish line gap (FLG), axial wall gap (AWG), cuspal gap (CG), proximal transition gap (PTG), and central fossa gap (CFG). The correlation between each of the 3 extraoral digitizing methods and the adaptation status of the crown margins were also evaluated. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman's rank test, and Chi-square test were used for data analysis (α = 0.05). The marginal gaps in the ST, SI, and SC groups differed significantly (24, 198 and 117.6 µm, respectively) (p < 0.05). Significant differences were found between the groups with regard to internal gap measurements, with SI representing higher gap measurements at FLG, PTG and CFG locations (p < 0.05). 3D volumetric gap measurements did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). Under-extended margins observed in the SI and SC groups were correlated with the digitizing method (Cramer's V-square: 0.14). When performing extraoral digitalization, clinicians should choose to scan the stone cast as scanning the stone cast resulted in better internal and marginal fit compared to scanning the impression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
Full text from SpringerLink