Fit and retention of complete denture bases: Part I - Conventional versus CAD-CAM methods: A clinical controlled crossover study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Clinical evidence is sparse on whether dentures fabricated by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) methods afford superior fit and retention when compared with those fabricated conventionally. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical controlled crossover study was to evaluate the peak retention force and fit of CAD-CAM manufactured (3D-printed and milled) maxillary complete denture bases and conventional heat-polymerized bases (control). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty participants with edentulous maxillary arches were recruited. Impressions were made with a border-molded custom tray, and the resulting definitive cast was scanned. The conventional base was manufactured on the definitive cast with a hook and a 45-degree platform with a central notch and 2 lateral notches. The scan of the definitive cast was used for the fabrication of a milled and a printed base. The platform and hook position on the conventional base were transferred digitally to the milled and printed bases. All bases were scanned. A traction dynamometer was orientated into the notches, and retention was evaluated in the post dam and tuberosity areas. Scans were imported into a comparison software program which matched scans to their corresponding reference and performed a 3-dimensional comparison. The Friedman and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare between groups (confidence interval: 95%, α=.05). RESULTS: Nineteen participants with a mean ±standard deviation age of 64.1 ±14.7 years completed all clinical sessions. No significant difference in peak retention was measured between milled (MB1), printed (PB1), and conventional (CB) bases in the post dam (CB: 12.44 ±9.62 N, PB1: 16.08 ±15.28 N, MB1: 14.52 ±17.07 N) and right tuberosity area (CB: 8.99 ±7.82 N, PB1: 11.28 ±9.57 N, MB1: 11.99 ±12.10 N). In the left tuberosity area, peak retention was lower for CB (10.03 ±8.39 N) than PB1 (14.98 ±14.72 N) and MB1 (13.55 ±15.53 N; P=.05). Compared with the definitive cast, the fit of the conventional base (0.18 ±0.01 mm) was closer than the printed (0.21 ±0.03 mm) and milled bases (0.21 ±0.02 mm) (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The CD bases manufactured by CAD-CAM techniques provided retention and fit similar to that of conventionally manufactured bases and can therefore be considered suitable techniques.