Journal of Contemporary Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 2 , ISSUE 1 ( January-April, 2012 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Comparative Evaluation of Marginal Fit of Crowns Fabricated by Three All Ceramic CAD-CAM Systems Using Their Respective Scanners - An in vitro study

Sabita M. Ram, Niku Agarwal

Citation Information : Ram SM, Agarwal N. A Comparative Evaluation of Marginal Fit of Crowns Fabricated by Three All Ceramic CAD-CAM Systems Using Their Respective Scanners - An in vitro study. J Contemp Dent 2012; 2 (1):10-19.

DOI: 10.5005/jcd-2-1-10

License: CC BY-ND 3.0

Published Online: 01-04-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim

To evaluate and compare the marginal fit of crowns fabricated by three All Ceramic CAD-CAM systems using their respective scanners.

Objectives

1. To evaluate the marginal fit of All Ceramic crowns fabricated using Contact scanner- Procera system. 2. To evaluate the marginal fit of All Ceramic crowns fabricated using Optical scanner-Lava system. 3. To evaluate the marginal fit of All Ceramic crowns fabricated using Laser scanner-Cercon system. 4. To compare the marginal fit of crowns fabricated by three All Ceramic CAD-CAM systems using their respective scanner-Contact scanner, Optical scanner and Laser scanner.

Materials and Methods

5 crowns fabricated with Contact scanner- Procera system (Group I), 5 crowns fabricated with Optical scanner-Lava system (Group II), 5 crowns fabricated with Laser scanner-Cercon system(Group III). The marginal fit would be evaluated at two stages for each group: A- Pre-veneering stage (coping) B-Post-veneering stage (crown).

Results

The mean value of marginal gap with Group IA was 27.48 +2.63 and IB was 26.13+ 0.85 and that of Group IIA was 23.27 + 0.99 and IIB 19.22 + 0.88. The mean value of marginal gap of Group IIIA was 32.80 + 2.46 and IIIB was 28.77 + 1.94.

Conclusion

The marginal gap was maximum with Group III and minimum with group II amongst the three used systems. The mean marginal gap values of subgroup B were less than subgroup A.


PDF Share
  1. , Miara, Nathanson D. Esthetic dentistry and ceramic restoration London; Martiz Dunitz: 1999.
  2. McLean. Evaluation of dental ceramics in the twentieth century. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85:61-6.
  3. , Agneta. Procera a new way to achieve an all-ceramic crown. Quintessence International 1998; 29:285-95.
  4. Porcelain-fused-to-metal vs. non-metal crowns. JADA 1999; 30:409-11.
  5. A panorama of dental CAD-CAM restorative systems. Compendium July 2006;26:507-25.
  6. A new technology revolution in all ceramic systems. Famdent Dec 2006:55-59
  7. Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. 2nd Edition 1995; St. Louis: Mosby Publication; p.437.
  8. Peridontal conditions in patients treated with dental bridges: III The relationship between location of the crown margin and the periodontal condition. J Periodont Res 1970;5:225-229.
  9. Anterior crowns and gingival health. Aus Dent J. 1979; 24:225-30.
  10. , Albuffy G., du Port de Poncharra L., Laborde G. Clincial evaluation of marginal fit of LAVA all ceramic system. European Cells and materials; 10: 21-25.
  11. Marginal fit of lucite glass pressable ceramic restoration and ceramic pressed to metal restoration. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93:143-47.
  12. , Aynur Cinar and Selim Pamuk. Effect of porcelain and glaze firing cycles on the fit of 3 types of all ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 45:456-59.
  13. Infl uence of three different finish line designs on the marginal adaptation of electroformed crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 95:237-42.
  14. All-Ceramic Alternatives to Conventional Metal Ceramic Restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1998; 3: 307-325.
  15. The Nature of Dental Ceramics and their Clinical Use. Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc. Chicago 1979:USA.
  16. Sorensen. All Ceramic Systems. BDJ 1999; 106:409.
  17. A investigations of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap.
  18. , Laosonthorn White. Microleakage – Full crowns and the dental pulp. J. Endo 1982; 18: 473-75.
  19. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65: 357-54.
  20. Sorensen. Precision of fit: zirconia three-unit fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Invest 2008.
  21. Restorative dental materials ed. 9 1993;336-61.
  22. Distortion of occlusal porcelain during glazing. J Prosthet Dent 1982;47:154-56.
  23. IPS Empres All Ceramic crowns Laboratory manual Anberst New York: Ivoclar North America 1992:1-10.
  24. , Hang W., Albert F. The infl uence of multiple firing on thermal contraction of ceramic materials used for the fabrication of layered all-ceramic dental restorations. Dental Materials 2005;21:557-564.
  25. T., Svare C.W., Turner. The effect of repeated firing and strength on marginal distortion in two metal ceramic systems. J Prosthet Dent 1981; 45: 505-507.
  26. D., Pelleter. The thermal cycling distortion of metal ceramics Part III etiology. J. Prosthet Dent 1992;68:284-289.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.