• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.219-225
• /
• 2013

PURPOSE. Few studies have investigated the marginal accuracy of 3-unit zirconia fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system. The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal fit of zirconia FPDs made using two CAD/CAM systems with that of metal-ceramic FPDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Artificial resin maxillary central and lateral incisors were prepared for 3-unit FPDs and fixed in yellow stone. This model was duplicated to epoxy resin die. On the resin die, 15 three-unit FPDs were fabricated per group (45 in total): Group A, zirconia 3-unit FPDs made with the Everest system; Group B, zirconia 3-unit FPDs made with the Lava system; and Group C, metal-ceramic 3-unit FPDs. They were cemented to resin dies with resin cement. After removal of pontic, each retainer was separated and observed under a microscope (Presize 440C). Marginal gaps of experimental groups were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Duncan test. RESULTS. Mean marginal gaps of 3-unit FPDs were $60.46{\mu}m$ for the Everest group, $78.71{\mu}m$ for the Lava group, and $81.32{\mu}m$ for the metal-ceramic group. The Everest group demonstrated significantly smaller marginal gap than the Lava and the metal-ceramic groups (P<.05). The marginal gap did not significantly differ between the Lava and the metal-ceramic groups (P>.05). CONCLUSION. The marginal gaps of anterior 3-unit zirconia FPD differed according to CAD/CAM systems, but still fell within clinically acceptable ranges compared with conventional metal-ceramic restoration.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.16-22
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the marginal and mesial fitness of zirconia single copings and 3-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) manufactured with an identical model. Materials and Methods: An epoxy model in which the maxillary right 2nd premolar is lost and maxillary 1st premolar and 2nd molar are formed as abutments was manufactured and scanned by using a laser scanner. A ten units of zirconia single copings were manufactured for maxillary 1st premolar and 2nd molar, respectively and the same number of 3-unit FPDs were manufactured. For the measurements of fitness, the manufactured silicone replicas were divided into four parts and the fitness were measured by digital microscope at measurement points (P1, P2, P3, P4 and P5) of each plane. The measured gaps were classified into three categories: marginal gap (MG, P1), axial gap (AG, average of P2 and P3), occlusal gap (OG, average of P4 and P5). Results: The ranges of MG, AG and OG for single copings were 18.47 - 40.54 ${\mu}m$, 39.73 - 73.61 ${\mu}m$ and 116.90 - 134.69 ${\mu}m$, respectively. The ranges of MG, AG and OG for 3-unit FPDs were 45.95 - 87.44 ${\mu}m$, 23.78 - 57.00 ${\mu}m$ and 99.89 - 131.06 ${\mu}m$, respectively. Conclusion: The result of the study shows that the MGs for 3-unit FPDs were higher than those of single copings, though they are within the range of clinical acceptance, indicating that the use of more homogeneous zirconia block and modification of sintering processes are needed to ensure the prevention of increase of gap in 3-unit FPDs.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.22-29
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. This study aimed to investigate the potential clinical application of digitized silicone rubber impressions by comparing the accuracy of zirconia 3-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated from 2 types of data (working model and impression) obtained from a laser scanner. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ten working models and impressions were prepared with epoxy resin and vinyl polysiloxane, respectively. Based on the data obtained from the laser scanner (D-700; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark), a total of 20 zirconia frameworks were prepared using a dental CAD/CAM system (DentalDesigner; 3shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark / Ener-mill, Dentaim, Seoul, Korea). The silicone replicas were sectioned into four pieces to evaluate the framework fit. The replicas were imaged using a digital microscope, and the fit of the reference points (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7) were measured using the program in the device. Measured discrepancies were divided into 5 categories of gaps (MG, CG, AWG, AOTG, OG). Data were analyzed with Student's t-test ($\alpha$=0.05), repeated measures ANOVA and two-way ANOVA (${\alpha}=0.05$). RESULTS. The mean gap of the zirconia framework prepared from the working models presented a narrower discrepancy than the frameworks fabricated from the impression bodies. The mean of the total gap in premolars (P=.003) and molars (P=.002) exhibited a statistical difference between two groups. CONCLUSION. The mean gap dimensions of each category showed statistically significant difference. Nonetheless, the digitized impression bodies obtained with a laser scanner were applicable to clinical settings, considering the clinically acceptable marginal fit ($120{\mu}m$).