Marginal Discrepancy and Internal Fit of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Laminate Veneers: An In Vitro Study

Overview

Journal J Funct Biomater

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2024 Nov 26

PMID 39590542

Authors

Arwa Daghrery

Honey Lunkad

Khalid Mobarki

Majed Alhazmi

Hussain Khubrani

Thilla Sekar Vinothkumar

Eman Jabarti

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The clinical success of laminate veneers depends upon their marginal discrepancy (MD) and internal gap (IG). This study aims to compare and evaluate the MD, overall discrepancy (OD), absolute marginal discrepancy (AMD), and IG of 3D-printed (Varseosmile TrinQ and Varseosmile Crown Plus) and computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM)-milled (Brilliant Crios) laminate veneers using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Thirty maxillary central incisors were prepared and divided randomly into three groups ( = 10). All teeth were scanned for veneer fabrication: Group PVT teeth with 3D-printed Varseosmile TrinQ, Group PVC teeth with 3D-printed Varseosmile Crown Plus, and Group BCM teeth with Brilliant Crios milled veneers. The specimens with respective veneers were scanned using CBCT, and the sectional images were measured for IG, MD, OD, and AMD. The mean values for MD recorded were 0.27, 0.31, and 0.40 for PVT, PVC, and BCM respectively). The mean values for IG recorded were as follows: PVT group-0.24, PVC group-0.28, and BCM group-0.39, and those for OD were as follows: PVT-0.22, PVC-0.32, and BCM-0.41. Intragroup significance was observed for IG and OD ( = 0.001). Findings revealed that milled veneers have a higher IG and MD than 3D-printed veneers, making them less clinically acceptable.

Citing Articles

Dimensional accuracy of additive and subtractive manufactured ceramic-reinforced hybrid composite inlays: a CBCT-based in vitro study.

Daghrery A, Vinothkumar T, Majrashi H, Faqihi G, Gofshi R, Almasoudi S Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):6048.

PMID: 39972095 PMC: 11840043. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-90611-1.

References

Shim J, Kim J, Jeong S, Choi Y, Ryu J . Printing accuracy, mechanical properties, surface characteristics, and microbial adhesion of 3D-printed resins with various printing orientations. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 124(4):468-475. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.034. View

Grzebieluch W, Kowalewski P, Grygier D, Rutkowska-Gorczyca M, Kozakiewicz M, Jurczyszyn K . Printable and Machinable Dental Restorative Composites for CAD/CAM Application-Comparison of Mechanical Properties, Fractographic, Texture and Fractal Dimension Analysis. Materials (Basel). 2021; 14(17). PMC: 8434230. DOI: 10.3390/ma14174919. View

Al-Dwairi Z, Al-Sardi M, Goodacre B, Goodacre C, Al Hamad K, Ozcan M . Evaluation of Marginal and Internal Fit of Ceramic Laminate Veneers Fabricated with Five Intraoral Scanners and Indirect Digitization. Materials (Basel). 2023; 16(6). PMC: 10055617. DOI: 10.3390/ma16062181. View

Bergler M, Korostoff J, Torrecillas-Martinez L, Mante F . Ceramic Printing - Comparative Study of the Flexural Strength of 3D Printed and Milled Zirconia. Int J Prosthodont. 2021; 35(6):777–783. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.6749. View

De Freitas B, Tonin B, Macedo A, Dos Santos T, De Mattos M, Hotta T . Adaptation accuracy of milled lithium disilicate crowns: A 2D and 3D microCT analysis. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020; 32(4):403-409. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12574. View

Alwadai G, Al Moaleem M, Daghrery A, Albar N, Daghriri A, Alghamdi M . A Comparative Analysis of Marginal Adaptation Values between Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics and Zirconia-Reinforced Lithium Silicate Endocrowns: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies. Med Sci Monit. 2023; 29:e942649. PMC: 10758219. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.942649. View

Kim K, Kim J, Kim W, Kim J . In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of three-unit fixed dental prostheses produced by stereolithography. Dent Mater J. 2014; 33(4):504-9. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2014-017. View

Sidhom M, Zaghloul H, Mosleh I, Eldwakhly E . Effect of Different CAD/CAM Milling and 3D Printing Digital Fabrication Techniques on the Accuracy of PMMA Working Models and Vertical Marginal Fit of PMMA Provisional Dental Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study. Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14(7). PMC: 9003362. DOI: 10.3390/polym14071285. View

Ioannidis A, Park J, Husler J, Bomze D, Muhlemann S, Ozcan M . An in vitro comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of ultrathin occlusal veneers made of 3D-printed zirconia, milled zirconia, and heat-pressed lithium disilicate. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 128(4):709-715. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.053. View

10.

Al-Dwairi Z, Alkhatatbeh R, Baba N, Goodacre C . A comparison of the marginal and internal fit of porcelain laminate veneers fabricated by pressing and CAD-CAM milling and cemented with 2 different resin cements. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 121(3):470-476. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.04.008. View

11.

Taha A, Hafez M . An in vitro study measuring marginal gaps of inlay restorations fabricated from different CAD-CAM materials after thermocycling. BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):974. PMC: 10702051. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03687-4. View

12.

Alghauli M, Alqutaibi A . 3D-printed intracoronal restorations, occlusal and laminate veneers: Clinical relevance, properties, and behavior compared to milled restorations; a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2024; 36(8):1153-1170. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.13228. View

13.

Daghrery A . Color Stability, Gloss Retention, and Surface Roughness of 3D-Printed versus Indirect Prefabricated Veneers. J Funct Biomater. 2023; 14(10). PMC: 10607754. DOI: 10.3390/jfb14100492. View

14.

Mauad L, Doriguetto P, de Almeida D, Fardim K, Machado A, Devito K . Quantitative assessment of artefacts and identification of gaps in prosthetic crowns: a comparative in vitro study between periapical radiography and CBCT images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2020; 50(3):20200134. PMC: 7923067. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20200134. View

15.

Naveen H, Pillai L, Porwal A, Nadiger R, Guttal S . Effect of porcelain-firing cycles and surface finishing on the marginal discrepancy of titanium copings. J Prosthodont. 2011; 20(2):101-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00668.x. View

16.

Ashy L, Marghalani H . Internal and Marginal Adaptation of Adhesive Resin Cements Used for Luting Inlay Restorations: An In Vitro Micro-CT Study. Materials (Basel). 2022; 15(17). PMC: 9457854. DOI: 10.3390/ma15176161. View

17.

Alharbi N, Alharbi S, Cuijpers V, Osman R, Wismeijer D . Three-dimensional evaluation of marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed interim restorations fabricated on different finish line designs. J Prosthodont Res. 2017; 62(2):218-226. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2017.09.002. View

18.

Daher R, Ardu S, di Bella E, Krejci I, Duc O . Efficiency of 3D printed composite resin restorations compared with subtractive materials: Evaluation of fatigue behavior, cost, and time of production. J Prosthet Dent. 2022; 131(5):943-950. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.08.001. View

19.

Peroz I, Mitsas T, Erdelt K, Kopsahilis N . Marginal adaptation of lithium disilicate ceramic crowns cemented with three different resin cements. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 23(1):315-320. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2438-6. View

20.

Ferrairo B, Piras F, Lima F, Honorio H, Duarte M, Borges A . Comparison of marginal adaptation and internal fit of monolithic lithium disilicate crowns produced by 4 different CAD/CAM systems. Clin Oral Investig. 2020; 25(4):2029-2036. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03511-1. View