Performance of high-translucent zirconia CAD/CAM fixed dental prostheses using a digital workflow: A clinical study up to 6 years.
CAD/CAM
Digital dentistry
Digital impression
Intraoral scans
Prosthesis
Zirconia
Journal
Journal of dental sciences
ISSN: 2213-8862
Titre abrégé: J Dent Sci
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101293181
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2023
Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
28
07
2022
revised:
30
07
2022
entrez:
16
1
2023
pubmed:
17
1
2023
medline:
17
1
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Zirconia has recently become a popular material for fixed restorations. The purpose of this study was to use a digital workflow to fabricate monolithic zirconia fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and assess the connection between variable connector sizes compared to their clinical performance. Clinicians evaluated monolithic zirconia FDPs in 58 patients. After definitive impressions were made, stone casts were obtained. The stone casts were scanned to a standard triangle language (STL) file. A digital wax up was fabricated, and corresponding provisional restorations were milled. Final FDPs were fabricated from a high-translucent zirconia material. During digital fabrication, the connector area of each FDP was recorded while meticulous attention was paid to ensure that the connector cross-sectional area was ≥9 mm A total of 23 men and 35 women received a total of 63 full-contour zirconia FDPs in the posterior regions and were observed for a time period ranging between 50 and 70 months. No decementation occurred and no caries were detected during the observation period, however signs of gingivitis were detected in 4 patients. The dimension of the connector areas was 12 mm The results of this study suggest that the use of digital scanning and milling to fabricate monolithic zirconia FDPs of posterior regions may be an acceptable alternative restorative approach to traditional metal-ceramic restorations.
Sections du résumé
Background/purpose
UNASSIGNED
Zirconia has recently become a popular material for fixed restorations. The purpose of this study was to use a digital workflow to fabricate monolithic zirconia fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and assess the connection between variable connector sizes compared to their clinical performance.
Materials and methods
UNASSIGNED
Clinicians evaluated monolithic zirconia FDPs in 58 patients. After definitive impressions were made, stone casts were obtained. The stone casts were scanned to a standard triangle language (STL) file. A digital wax up was fabricated, and corresponding provisional restorations were milled. Final FDPs were fabricated from a high-translucent zirconia material. During digital fabrication, the connector area of each FDP was recorded while meticulous attention was paid to ensure that the connector cross-sectional area was ≥9 mm
Results
UNASSIGNED
A total of 23 men and 35 women received a total of 63 full-contour zirconia FDPs in the posterior regions and were observed for a time period ranging between 50 and 70 months. No decementation occurred and no caries were detected during the observation period, however signs of gingivitis were detected in 4 patients. The dimension of the connector areas was 12 mm
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
The results of this study suggest that the use of digital scanning and milling to fabricate monolithic zirconia FDPs of posterior regions may be an acceptable alternative restorative approach to traditional metal-ceramic restorations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36643237
doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2022.07.023
pii: S1991-7902(22)00183-0
pmc: PMC9831836
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
44-49Informations de copyright
© 2022 Association for Dental Sciences of the Republic of China. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.
Références
J Dent Res. 2018 Feb;97(2):132-139
pubmed: 28876966
J Dent Sci. 2022 Jan;17(1):592-594
pubmed: 35028093
J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Aug;126(2):196-203
pubmed: 32800577
J Dent. 2013 Nov;41(11):992-9
pubmed: 23954574
Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Jun;16(3):977-85
pubmed: 21667056
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:199-214
pubmed: 30328190
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jun;26(6):4327-4335
pubmed: 35142924
Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Dec;20(9):2467-2473
pubmed: 26924133
J Dent Sci. 2022 Jan;17(1):63-69
pubmed: 35028021
J Am Dent Assoc. 2020 Apr;151(4):230-238.e7
pubmed: 32222175
J Dent Sci. 2022 Jul;17(3):1413-1414
pubmed: 35784169
J Prosthodont. 2019 Jan;28(1):64-70
pubmed: 30478870
BMC Oral Health. 2020 Sep 22;20(1):263
pubmed: 32962680
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Aug;31(8):669-686
pubmed: 32329094
J Dent Sci. 2021 Oct;16(4):1312-1314
pubmed: 34484605
J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Jun;127(6):846-851
pubmed: 33495043
J Oral Sci. 2018;60(1):1-7
pubmed: 29576569
J Prosthodont. 2015 Oct;24(7):598-601
pubmed: 25605572
J Dent Sci. 2022 Jan;17(1):184-193
pubmed: 35028037
Dent Mater. 2020 Jan;36(1):1-8
pubmed: 31500904
BMC Oral Health. 2021 Dec 10;21(1):636
pubmed: 34893053
J Dent Sci. 2020 Jun;15(2):239-242
pubmed: 32595911
Dent Mater. 2009 Sep;25(9):e63-71
pubmed: 19523678
J Dent Sci. 2022 Jan;17(1):607-608
pubmed: 35028098
J Prosthet Dent. 2012 Jun;107(6):373-9
pubmed: 22633593
Dent Mater J. 2020 Jan 31;39(1):52-56
pubmed: 31723066
J Dent Sci. 2021 Mar;16(2):784-785
pubmed: 33854736
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Mar;26(3):3041-3048
pubmed: 34845525
J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2020 Fall;14(4):218-222
pubmed: 33575010
Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2020 Dec;56(1):1-23
pubmed: 31768195
Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Jul;18(6):1687-94
pubmed: 24240949
Biomater Investig Dent. 2020 Jan 7;7(1):9-15
pubmed: 32010901
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Feb;115(2):224-9
pubmed: 26547519