In vivo wear of CAD-CAM composite versus lithium disilicate full coverage first-molar restorations: a pilot study over 2 years.
Abrasion
CAD/CAM composite
Dental materials
Lithium disilicate
Wear
Wear behavior
Journal
Clinical oral investigations
ISSN: 1436-3771
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Investig
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9707115
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
19
08
2019
accepted:
17
04
2020
pubmed:
14
5
2020
medline:
22
12
2020
entrez:
14
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To present a digital approach to measure and compare material wear behavior of antagonistic first molar restorations made of an experimental CAD/CAM composite (COMP) and lithium disilicate ceramic (LS2) in patients with reconstructed vertical dimension of occlusion (VDO) after generalized hard tissue loss. A total of 12 patients underwent complete full jaw rehabilitation with full occlusal coverage restorations made either of COMP or LS2. The first molar restorations (n = 48) were chosen for wear examination. At annual recall appointments, polyether impressions were taken, and resulting plaster casts were digitalized using a laboratory scanner. Mean observation period was 371 days for first and 769 days for second year. The resulting 96 datasets were analyzed by superimposition of 3-D datasets using an iterative best-fit method. Based on the superimposition data, the wear rates of the occlusal contact areas (OCAs) were calculated. For antagonistic restorations made of COMP, the average wear rate was 24.8 ± 13.3 μm/month, while for LS2, it was 9.5 ± 4.3 μm/month in first year, with significant differences (p < 0.0001) between the materials. In second year, monthly wear rates decreased significantly for both materials: COMP (16.2 ± 10.7 μm/month) and LS2 (5.5 ± 3.3 μm/month). Statistical comparison between wear time showed significant differences for both materials: COMP p < 0.037 and LS2 p < 0.001. A logarithmic fit (COMP R In patients with reconstructed VDO, restorations made of LS2 show a more stable wear behavior than ones out of experimental CAD/CAM composite. In cases of complete rehabilitation, load bearing CAD/CAM-composite restorations should be critically considered for application due to their occlusal wear behavior. However, when choosing a restorative material, not only the functional occlusal stability should be taken into account but also the prospect of minimally invasive treatment with maximum preservation of natural tooth structures.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32399736
doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03294-5
pii: 10.1007/s00784-020-03294-5
pmc: PMC7666668
doi:
Substances chimiques
lithia disilicate
0
Dental Porcelain
12001-21-7
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
4301-4311Références
Dent Mater. 2014 May;30(5):499-506
pubmed: 24612841
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Oct;116(4):543-550.e1
pubmed: 27112413
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2012 Oct;24(5):310-8
pubmed: 23025313
Oper Dent. 2016 Jan-Feb;41(1):53-63
pubmed: 26266648
J Prosthet Dent. 2009 Aug;102(2):104-14
pubmed: 19643224
J Prosthet Dent. 2010 Sep;104(3):149-57
pubmed: 20813228
Int J Prosthodont. 2008 May-Jun;21(3):245-52
pubmed: 18548965
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Mar;115(3):313-20
pubmed: 26548890
J Prosthet Dent. 2011 Apr;105(4):217-26
pubmed: 21458646
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015 Mar;55:1-11
pubmed: 26519658
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 May;21(4):1165-1172
pubmed: 27277661
J Oral Rehabil. 2016 Jan;43(1):69-80
pubmed: 26333037
J Oral Rehabil. 2015 Nov;42(11):875-82
pubmed: 26140528
J Calif Dent Assoc. 2006 Feb;34(2):135-47
pubmed: 16724469
J Dent. 2018 Mar;70:97-103
pubmed: 29339203
J Prosthet Dent. 2013 May;109(5):325-32
pubmed: 23684283
Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Aug;14(4):441-58
pubmed: 19669176
Dent Mater. 2006 Aug;22(8):702-11
pubmed: 16530263
Eur J Oral Sci. 2001 Aug;109(4):273-81
pubmed: 11531074
J Dent Res. 1983 May;62(5):562-5
pubmed: 6573372
Br Dent J. 1997 Mar 8;182(5):179-84
pubmed: 9134802
J Dent Res. 1997 Nov;76(11):1799-807
pubmed: 9372798
J Oral Rehabil. 1976 Jul;3(3):201-6
pubmed: 1068232
Dent Mater J. 2013;32(5):787-92
pubmed: 24088835
Dent Mater. 2018 Jun;34(6):825-850
pubmed: 29627079
J Dent Res. 1989 Dec;68(12):1752-4
pubmed: 2600255
Caries Res. 2012;46(1):9-15
pubmed: 22156738
Monogr Oral Sci. 2014;25:1-15
pubmed: 24993253
J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Mar;139(3):347-9
pubmed: 18310740
J Dent Res. 2016 May;95(5):487-95
pubmed: 26933136
Oper Dent. 2018 Jan/Feb;43(1):38-50
pubmed: 28857711
J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Sep;84(3):353-9
pubmed: 11005910
J Adhes Dent. 2017;19(2):111-119
pubmed: 28439579
J Dent Res. 2006 Dec;85(12):1097-100
pubmed: 17122161
J Dent. 2018 Jan;68:19-27
pubmed: 29042241
J Prosthodont Res. 2014 Apr;58(2):107-14
pubmed: 24636368
Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Sep;20(7):1487-94
pubmed: 26454734
Dent Mater. 2009 Nov;25(11):1302-14
pubmed: 19577288
Clin Oral Investig. 2019 May;23(5):2421-2427
pubmed: 30298453
Dent Mater J. 2019 Jun 1;38(3):343-353
pubmed: 30918233
Quintessence Int. 2016 Mar;47(3):207-16
pubmed: 26925471
J Oral Rehabil. 2008 Oct;35(10):782-8
pubmed: 18482349
Biomaterials. 2004 Jun;25(14):2885-92
pubmed: 14962567
Dent Mater. 2008 Apr;24(4):433-49
pubmed: 17720238
Dent Mater. 1992 Sep;8(5):305-9
pubmed: 1303372
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Oct;116(4):474-482
pubmed: 27132785
J Dent. 2008 Sep;36(9):703-10
pubmed: 18554772
Dent Mater. 1985 Feb;1(1):27-30
pubmed: 3860453
J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Sep;114(3):358-63
pubmed: 25985742
Dent Mater. 2012 Mar;28(3):245-51
pubmed: 22094292
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Jun;21(5):1445-1455
pubmed: 27406138