Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
J Appl Oral Sci ; 24(1): 85-94, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27008261

ABSTRACT

UNLABELLED: The computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) process chain for dental restorations starts with taking an impression of the clinical situation. For this purpose, either extraoral digitization of gypsum models or intraoral digitization can be used. Despite the increasing use of dental digitizing systems, there are only few studies on their accuracy. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the accuracy of various intraoral and extraoral digitizing systems for dental CAD/CAM technology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An experimental setup for three-dimensional analysis based on 2 prepared ceramic master dies and their corresponding virtual CAD-models was used to assess the accuracy of 10 extraoral and 4 intraoral optical non-contact dental digitizing systems. Depending on the clinical procedure, 10 optical measurements of either 10 duplicate gypsum dies (extraoral digitizing) or directly of the ceramic master dies (intraoral digitizing) were made and compared with the corresponding CAD-models. RESULTS: The digitizing systems showed differences in accuracy. However, all topical systems were well within the benchmark of ±20 µm. These results apply to single tooth measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Study results are limited, since only single teeth were used for comparison. The different preparations represent various angles and steep and parallel opposing tooth surfaces (incisors). For most digitizing systems, the latter are generally the most difficult to capture. Using CAD/CAM technologies, the preparation angles should not be too steep to reduce digitizing errors. Older systems might be limited to a certain height or taper of the prepared tooth, whereas newer systems (extraoral as well as intraoral digitization) do not have these limitations.


Subject(s)
Computer-Aided Design , Dental Impression Technique , Dental Restoration, Permanent/methods , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Analysis of Variance , Calcium Sulfate , Ceramics , Dental Impression Materials , Dental Prosthesis Design , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Reproducibility of Results
2.
J. appl. oral sci ; 24(1): 85-94, Jan.-Feb. 2016. graf
Article in English | LILACS, BBO - Dentistry | ID: lil-777361

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT The computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) process chain for dental restorations starts with taking an impression of the clinical situation. For this purpose, either extraoral digitization of gypsum models or intraoral digitization can be used. Despite the increasing use of dental digitizing systems, there are only few studies on their accuracy. Objective This study compared the accuracy of various intraoral and extraoral digitizing systems for dental CAD/CAM technology. Material and Methods An experimental setup for three-dimensional analysis based on 2 prepared ceramic master dies and their corresponding virtual CAD-models was used to assess the accuracy of 10 extraoral and 4 intraoral optical non-contact dental digitizing systems. Depending on the clinical procedure, 10 optical measurements of either 10 duplicate gypsum dies (extraoral digitizing) or directly of the ceramic master dies (intraoral digitizing) were made and compared with the corresponding CAD-models. Results The digitizing systems showed differences in accuracy. However, all topical systems were well within the benchmark of ±20 µm. These results apply to single tooth measurements. Conclusions Study results are limited, since only single teeth were used for comparison. The different preparations represent various angles and steep and parallel opposing tooth surfaces (incisors). For most digitizing systems, the latter are generally the most difficult to capture. Using CAD/CAM technologies, the preparation angles should not be too steep to reduce digitizing errors. Older systems might be limited to a certain height or taper of the prepared tooth, whereas newer systems (extraoral as well as intraoral digitization) do not have these limitations.


Subject(s)
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Dental Impression Technique , Computer-Aided Design , Dental Restoration, Permanent/methods , Calcium Sulfate , Ceramics , Reproducibility of Results , Analysis of Variance , Dental Prosthesis Design , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Dental Impression Materials
3.
Trials ; 16: 467, 2015 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26470711

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Against the background of increasing use of dental implants, and thus an increasing prevalence of implant-associated complications, a deeper understanding of the biomolecular mechanisms in the peri-implant tissue is needed. Peri-implant soft tissue is in direct contact with transmucosal dental implant abutments. The aim of this trial is to distinguish the biomolecular and histological interactions of various dental abutment materials with peri-implant soft tissue. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is designed as a prospective, randomized, investigator-initiated clinical pilot trial with blinded assessment. We will ultimately include 24 eligible patients who opt for implant treatment to replace a single missing posterior tooth. Three months after implantation (submerged procedure), the study begins with the second-stage surgery. Each of the 24 patients will be given three different transmucosal abutments (zirconia, lithium disilicate, titanium) consecutively. The sequence in which the three materials are used is randomized. Peri-implant crevicular fluid is sampled weekly around the respective abutment for biomolecular analyses. After one month of wearing time, the stamping press from the second-stage surgery is used to gain a narrow gingival ring biopsy around the abutment for immunohistochemical analyses. The next abutment is then inserted. The same procedure is used for all three abutments. After sampling is completed, the patients will receive a definitive crown. The primary outcome measure of the trial is biomolecular detection of specific markers in the peri-implant crevicular fluid: matrix metalloproteinase 8, interleukin- 1ß, polymorphonuclear elastase, and myeloid-related protein MRP8/14 (calprotectin). Secondary outcome measures include immunohistochemical analyses and clinical parameters. DISCUSSION: The study design will allow us to perform correlation analyses between the clinical indices with biomarkers' expression in the interface of the transmucosal abutments and the peri-implant soft tissue. A deeper understanding of the three abutment materials' interactions with peri-implant soft tissue will help us understand the formation mechanisms of implant-associated complications and then develop prevention strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the German Clinical Trial Register and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform by the WHO under DRKS00006555 (Registered on 27 October 2014).


Subject(s)
Dental Abutments , Dental Implantation, Endosseous/instrumentation , Dental Implants, Single-Tooth , Dental Porcelain , Titanium , Zirconium , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers/metabolism , Biopsy , Crowns , Dental Abutments/adverse effects , Dental Implant-Abutment Design , Dental Implantation, Endosseous/adverse effects , Dental Implants, Single-Tooth/adverse effects , Dental Porcelain/adverse effects , Female , Germany , Gingival Crevicular Fluid/metabolism , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Interleukin-1beta/metabolism , Leukocyte Elastase/metabolism , Leukocyte L1 Antigen Complex/metabolism , Male , Matrix Metalloproteinase 8/metabolism , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Research Design , Time Factors , Titanium/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult , Zirconium/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL