Your browser doesn't support javascript.
A Biblioteca Cochrane foi excluída da BVS por decisão da Wiley de não renovação da licença de uso com a BIREME. Saiba mais.

BVS Odontologia

Informação e Conhecimento para a Saúde

Home > Pesquisa > ()
Imprimir Exportar

Formato de exportação:

Exportar

Email
Adicionar mais destinatários
| |

Marginal and Internal Gap of Handmade, Milled and 3D Printed Additive Manufactured Patterns for Pressed Lithium Disilicate Onlay Restorations.

Revilla-León, M; Olea-Vielba, M; Esteso-Saiz, A; Martínez-Klemm, I; Özcan, M.
Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 26(1): 31-38, 2018 Mar 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29461746
STATEMENT OF THE

PROBLEM:

On a pressed lithium disilicate restoration, the building up of a wax pattern of the future restoration is a necessary step on the fabrication process. Conventionally, a wax pattern can be produced by handmade or milled procedures; however, the development of additive manufacturing technologies allows a new fabrication method.

PURPOSE:

The present study measured the marginal and internal gap of handmade, milled and additive manufactured patterns for an onlay restoration. MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

A preparation of an onlay restoration was made on an extracted mandibular tooth. A definitive cast was fabricated from a conventional silicone impression of the prepared tooth. Three groups were established handmade (HM), milled (ML) and additive manufactured (AM); 4 specimens per group were obtained. The marginal and internal gap of each pattern was measured on the extracted molar through a computed tomography test. Sixty measurements were done to measure the marginal gap and another 60 measurements were calculated to analyze the internal gap on each pattern on the prepared tooth. A total of 1.440 measurements were completed. Mann-Whitney and Turkey statistical tests were used for pairwise comparison.

RESULTS:

The mean of the marginal and internal gap was of 67.56 ± 6.08 µm and 80.62 ± 3.26 µm for the HM group, 85.28 ± 2.17 µm and 96 ± 1.97 µm for the ML group and 86.49 ± 1.74 µm and 91.86 ± 2.88 µm for the AM group, respectively. The HM group presented significantly lower marginal (p=0.029) and internal (p=0.029) gap compared to the ML and AM groups. There was no statistical significant difference (p=0.486) on the marginal gap between the ML and the AM groups, but the AM group, showed significantly (p=0.029) smaller internal gap than the ML group.

CONCLUSIONS:

All the groups presented less than 100 µm marginal and internal gap, which is a considered clinically acceptable. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS The three fabrication processes are viable option for manufacturing patterns for lithium disilicate onlay restorations, but the best marginal and internal fit was still obtained by the conventional handmade procedures.