Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava™ C.O.S and conventional impression technique

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Evaluation of the marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with Lava™ Chairside Oral Scanner in comparison to that of zirconia copings manufactured after conventional impressions with polyvinyl siloxane.

Methods

A prepared typodont tooth #36, was replicated 40 times with a vinyl silicone and precise model resin. The dies were randomly divided into two groups according to the impression taking technique. Digital impressions with Lava™ C.O.S. and conventional impressions were taken according to the group. Subsequently zirconia copings were manufactured and cemented on their respective dies with zinc oxide phosphate cement. After embedding in resin, mesio-distal section of each coping was performed with a diamond saw in order to obtain two slices. One half of the specimen was used for evaluation with an optical microscope (OM) and the other half for evaluation with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Marginal gap (MG) and absolute marginal discrepancy (AMD) were measured mesial and distal on each slice.

Results

No significant difference of the marginal parameters between the digital and the conventional group was found. The mean values for MG in the digital group were 96.28 μm (+/−43.21 μm) measured with the OM and 99.26 μm (+/−48.73 μm) measured with the SEM, respectively. AMD mean values were 191.54 μm (+/−85.42 μm) measured with the optical microscope and 211.6 μm (+/−96.55 μm) with the SEM. For the conventional group the mean MG values were 94.84 μm (+/−50.77 μm) measured with the OM and 83.37 μm (+/−44.38 μm) measured with the SEM, respectively. AMD mean values were 158.60 μm (+/−69.14 μm) for the OM and 152.72 μm (+/−72.36) for the SEM.

Conclusions

Copings manufactured after digital impression with Lava™ C.O.S. show comparable marginal parameters with the copings manufactured after conventional impression with polyvinyl syloxane. The mean MG values of both groups fit in the clinically acceptable range.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-016-0323-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Related collections

Most cited references 25

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Considerations in measurement of marginal fit.

J Robert Holmes, Stephen Bayne, Gene Holland … (1989)

The terminology describing "fit" and the techniques used for measuring fit vary considerably in the literature. Although fit can be most easily defined in terms of "misfit," there are many different locations between a tooth and a restoration where the measurements can be made. In this work, the measurements of misfit at different locations are geometrically related to each other and defined as internal gap, marginal gap, vertical marginal discrepancy, horizontal marginal discrepancy, overextended margin, underextended margin, absolute marginal discrepancy, and seating discrepancy. The significance and difference in magnitude of different locations are presented. The best alternative is perhaps the absolute marginal discrepancy, which would always be the largest measurement of error at the margin and would reflect the total misfit at that point.

0 comments Cited 137 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes

Emir Yuzbasioglu, Hanefi Kurt, Rana Turunc … (2014)

Background The purpose of this study was to compare two impression techniques from the perspective of patient preferences and treatment comfort. Methods Twenty-four (12 male, 12 female) subjects who had no previous experience with either conventional or digital impression participated in this study. Conventional impressions of maxillary and mandibular dental arches were taken with a polyether impression material (Impregum, 3 M ESPE), and bite registrations were made with polysiloxane bite registration material (Futar D, Kettenbach). Two weeks later, digital impressions and bite scans were performed using an intra-oral scanner (CEREC Omnicam, Sirona). Immediately after the impressions were made, the subjects’ attitudes, preferences and perceptions towards impression techniques were evaluated using a standardized questionnaire. The perceived source of stress was evaluated using the State-Trait Anxiety Scale. Processing steps of the impression techniques (tray selection, working time etc.) were recorded in seconds. Statistical analyses were performed with the Wilcoxon Rank test, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results There were significant differences among the groups (p < 0.05) in terms of total working time and processing steps. Patients stated that digital impressions were more comfortable than conventional techniques. Conclusions Digital impressions resulted in a more time-efficient technique than conventional impressions. Patients preferred the digital impression technique rather than conventional techniques.

0 comments Cited 110 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods.

Jonathan WX Ng, N Dorin Ruse, Chris Wyatt (2014)

Little evidence is available with regard to the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital impressions and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technology in comparison with crowns fabricated from conventional techniques.

0 comments Cited 57 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Rinet Dauti: 0043-1-40070-4549 , rinet.dauti@meduniwien.ac.at

Barbara Cvikl: 0043-1-40070-4549 , barbara.cvikl@meduniwien.ac.at

Alexander Franz: 0043-1-40070-4549 , alexander.franz@meduniwien.ac.at

Uwe Yacine Schwarze: uweyacine.schwarze@meduniwien.ac.at

Bledar Lilaj: bledar.lilaj@meduniwien.ac.at

Tina Rybaczek: tina.rybaczek@meduniwien.ac.at

Andreas Moritz: andreas.moritz@meduniwien.ac.at

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Oral Health

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Oral Health

Title: BMC Oral Health

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1472-6831

Publication date (Electronic): 8 December 2016

Publication date PMC-release: 8 December 2016

Publication date Collection: 2016

Volume: 16

Electronic Location Identifier: 129

Affiliations

[1 ]Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, Medical University of Vienna, Sensengasse 2A, 1090 Vienna, Austria

[2 ]Department of Preventive, Restorative and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

[3 ]Karl Donath Laboratory for Hard Tissue and Biomaterial Research, University Clinic of Dentistry, Vienna, Austria

[4 ]Department of Oral Biology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

[5 ]Department of Oral Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Article

Publisher ID: 323

DOI: 10.1186/s12903-016-0323-8

PMC ID: 5146899

PubMed ID: 27931256

SO-VID: ddfe7ba4-13be-4128-9047-e6d5b68c1339

License:

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

History

Date received : 31 August 2016

Date accepted : 28 November 2016

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Dentistry

Keywords: marginal gap,digital impression,lava c.o.s,zirconia copings

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Dentistry

Keywords: marginal gap, digital impression, lava c.o.s, zirconia copings

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 14

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 236

See all reference authors

Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava™ C.O.S and conventional impression technique

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Electronic supplementary material

Related collections

Arab Journal of Forensic Sciences & Forensic Medicine (AJFSFM)

Most cited references 25

Considerations in measurement of marginal fit.

Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes

A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods.

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 64

Cited by 14

Most referenced authors 236