Trueness and precision of 3D-printed versus milled monolithic zirconia crowns: An in vitro study.

3D printing Clinical precision Milling Monolithic zirconia crowns Trueness

Journal

Journal of dentistry
ISSN: 1879-176X
Titre abrégé: J Dent
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0354422

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2021
Historique:
received: 30 07 2021
revised: 14 08 2021
accepted: 18 08 2021
pubmed: 6 9 2021
medline: 30 10 2021
entrez: 5 9 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To compare the trueness and precision of 3D-printed versus milled monolithic zirconia crowns (MZCs). A model of a maxilla with a prepared premolar was scanned with an industrial scanner (ATOSQ®, Gom) and an MZC was designed in computer-assisted-design (CAD) software (DentalCad®, Exocad). From that standard tessellation language (STL) file, 10 MZCs (test) were 3D-printed with a Lithography-based Ceramic Manufacturing (LCM) printer (CerafabS65®, Lithoz) and 10 MZCs (control) were milled using a 5-axis machine (DWX-52D®, DGShape). All MZCs were sintered and scanned with the aforementioned scanner. The surface data of each sample (overall crown, marginal area, occlusal surface) were superimposed to the original CAD file (ControlX®, Geomagic) to evaluate trueness: (90-10)/2, absolute average (ABS AVG) and root mean square (RMS) values were obtained for test and control groups (MathLab®, Mathworks) and used for analysis. Finally, the clinical precision (marginal adaptation, interproximal contacts) of test and control MZCs was investigated on a split-cast model printed (Solflex350®, Voco) from the CAD project, and compared. The milled MZCs had a significantly higher trueness than the 3D-printed ones, overall [(90-10)/2 printed 37.8 µm vs milled 21.2 µm; ABS AVG printed 27.2 µm vs milled 15.1 µm; RMS printed 33.2 µm vs milled 20.5 µm; p = 0.000005], at the margins [(90-10)/2 printed 25.6 µm vs milled 12.4 µm; ABS AVG printed 17.8 µm vs milled 9.4 µm; RMS printed 22.8 µm vs milled 15.6 µm; p= 0.000011] and at the occlusal level [(90-10)/2 printed 50.4 µm vs milled 21.9 µm; ABS AVG printed 29.6 µm vs milled 14.7 µm; RMS printed 38.9 µm vs milled 22.5 µm; p = 0.000005]. However, with regard to precision, both test and control groups scored highly, with no significant difference either in the quality of interproximal contact points (p = 0.355) or marginal closure (p = 0.355). Milled MZCs had a statistically higher trueness than 3D-printed ones; all crowns, however, showed high precision, compatible with the clinical use. Although milled MZCs remain more accurate than 3D-printed ones, the LCM technique seems able to guarantee the production of clinically precise zirconia crowns.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34481929
pii: S0300-5712(21)00215-3
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103792
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Zirconium C6V6S92N3C
zirconium oxide S38N85C5G0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

103792

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Auteurs

Henriette Lerner (H)

Department of Oral Surgery, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary. Electronic address: h-lerner@web.de.

Katalin Nagy (K)

Department of Oral Surgery, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary. Electronic address: katalin.nagy@universityszeged.com.

Nicola Pranno (N)

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: nicola.pranno@uniroma1.it.

Fernando Zarone (F)

Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University Federico II, Naples, Italy. Electronic address: fernandozarone@mac.com.

Oleg Admakin (O)

Department of Pediatric, Preventive Dentistry and Orthodontics, Sechenov First State Medical University, Moscow, Russia. Electronic address: admakin1966@mail.ru.

Francesco Mangano (F)

Department of Pediatric, Preventive Dentistry and Orthodontics, Sechenov First State Medical University, Moscow, Russia. Electronic address: francescoguidomangano@gmail.com.

Articles similaires

Characterization of 3D printed composite for final dental restorations.

Lucas Eigi Borges Tanaka, Camila da Silva Rodrigues, Manassés Tércio Vieira Grangeiro et al.
1.00
Composite Resins Materials Testing Printing, Three-Dimensional Surface Properties Flexural Strength

Personalized bioceramic grafts for craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration.

Ana Beatriz G de Carvalho, Maedeh Rahimnejad, Rodrigo L M S Oliveira et al.
1.00
Humans Bone Regeneration Ceramics Printing, Three-Dimensional Tissue Scaffolds

3D-printed tooth for caries excavation.

Lisanne Carnier, Michael Del Hougne, Marc Schmitter et al.
1.00
Humans Printing, Three-Dimensional Dental Caries X-Ray Microtomography Dental Cavity Preparation
Phonons Titanium Oxides Zirconium Calcium Compounds

Classifications MeSH