» Articles » PMID: 24969409

Micro-computed Tomography Evaluation of Marginal Fit of Lithium Disilicate Crowns Fabricated by Using Chairside CAD/CAM Systems or the Heat-pressing Technique

Overview
Journal J Prosthet Dent
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2014 Jun 28
PMID 24969409
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Statement Of Problem: No consensus exists concerning the acceptable ranges of marginal fit for lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with either heat-pressing techniques or computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems.

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate with micro-computed tomography the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with different chairside CAD/CAM systems (Cerec or E4D) or the heat-pressing technique.

Material And Methods: Lithium disilicate crowns were fabricated to fit an in vitro cast of a single human premolar. Three fabrication techniques were used: digital impressions with Cerec 3D Bluecam scanner with titanium dioxide powder, followed by milling from IPS e.max CAD for Cerec; digital impressions with E4D Laser scanner without powder, followed by milling from IPS e.max CAD for E4D; and fabrication from IPS e.max Press by using the lost-wax and heat-pressing techniques. Each crown was fixed to the cast and scanned with micro-computed tomography to obtain 52 images for measuring the vertical and horizontal fit. Data were statistically analyzed by 1-way ANOVA, followed by the Tukey honestly significant difference test (α=.05).

Results: The mean values of vertical misfit were 36.8 ±13.9 μm for the heat-pressing group and 39.2 ±8.7 μm for the Cerec group, which were significantly smaller values than for the E4D group at 66.9 ±31.9 μm (P=.046). The percentage of crowns with a vertical misfit <75 μm was 83.8% for Cerec and heat-pressing, whereas this value was 65% for E4D. Both types of horizontal misfit (underextended and overextended) were 49.2% for heat-pressing, 50.8% for Cerec, and 58.8% for E4D.

Conclusions: Lithium disilicate crowns fabricated by using the Cerec 3D Bluecam scanner CAD/CAM system or the heat-pressing technique exhibited a significantly smaller vertical misfit than crowns fabricated by using an E4D Laser scanner CAD/CAM system.

Citing Articles

Micro CT evaluation of marginal discrepancies of endocrown restored molars with different intrapulpal depths and materials of fabrication. (in-vitro study).

Elagwany M, Hamdy A, Zohdy M, Mahrous A, Tawfik A, Nabih S BMC Oral Health. 2025; 25(1):142.

PMID: 39871214 PMC: 11773830. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-025-05474-9.


Evaluation of Marginal Fit of CAD/CAM Ceramic Crowns and Scanning Time Using Different Intraoral Scanning Systems.

Pereira L, de Melo B, Oliveira A, Mendonca G, Raposo L, Prudente M J Funct Biomater. 2024; 15(12).

PMID: 39728159 PMC: 11677190. DOI: 10.3390/jfb15120359.


Evaluating the accuracy of CEREC intraoral scanners for inlay restorations: impact of adjacent tooth materials.

Kwon Y, Kim J, Park J, Son S BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):1033.

PMID: 39227885 PMC: 11370093. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04794-6.


Enhancing Fixed Partial Denture Pontic Fabrication: An In Vitro Comparative Study of the Digital and Manual Techniques.

Vohra M, Shenoy A, Venugopalan S Cureus. 2024; 16(7):e65757.

PMID: 39211692 PMC: 11361329. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.65757.


The Impact of Open versus Closed Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Systems on the Marginal Gap of Zirconia-Reinforced Lithium Silicate Single Crowns Evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscopy: A Comparative In Vitro Study.

Shely A, Nissan J, Rosner O, Zenziper E, Lugassy D, Abidulkrem K J Funct Biomater. 2024; 15(5).

PMID: 38786641 PMC: 11122281. DOI: 10.3390/jfb15050130.