Geleneksel ve Dijital Ölçü Yöntemleri İle Üretilen Tam Seramik Kuronların Kenar ve İç Uyumu
Özet
Bu çalışma, sabit protetik diş tedavisinde geleneksel ve dijital ölçü yöntemleriyle üretilen tam seramik kuronların kenar ve iç uyumlarını karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemektedir. Sabit protezlerin uzun ömürlü ve klinik olarak başarılı olabilmesi için çevre dokularla uyumu, fonksiyonelliği ve restorasyonun kenar-iç uyumu kritik faktörlerdir. Uyumsuz restorasyonlar zamanla siman çözünmesine, hassasiyete, sekonder çürüklere ve periodontal rahatsızlıklara yol açabilmektedir. Günümüzde CAD/CAM sistemlerinin gelişmesiyle birlikte hastaların konforunu artıran, malzeme büzülmelerini ve laboratuvar süreçlerindeki boyutsal değişim hatalarını elimine eden dijital ölçü yöntemleri yaygınlaşmıştır. Literatürdeki çalışmalar, dijital ölçü sistemleri ile üretilen restorasyonların kenar ve iç uyum değerlerinin klinik olarak kabul edilebilir sınırlar içinde (kenar uyumu için 60-120 μm, iç uyum için 25-100 µm) olduğunu ve genellikle geleneksel yöntemlerle benzer veya daha iyi sonuçlar verdiğini göstermektedir. Ayrıca dijital iş akışı, hekime klinik ortamda eş zamanlı değerlendirme ve düzeltme imkanı tanıyarak zaman kaybını önlemektedir. Sonuç olarak, tam seramik sistemlerde kullanılan restoratif malzemeler ve tercih edilen ölçü yöntemleri uyumu doğrudan etkilemekte olup, dijital sistemler yüksek hasta memnuniyeti ve kısalan işlem basamakları ile klinikte önemli bir avantaj sunmaktadır.
This study comparatively examines the marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic crowns produced using conventional and digital impression methods in fixed prosthodontic treatment. For fixed prostheses to be durable and clinically successful, harmony with surrounding tissues, functionality, and the marginal-internal adaptation of the restoration are critical factors. Misfitting restorations can lead to cement dissolution, sensitivity, secondary caries, and periodontal diseases over time. Today, with the development of CAD/CAM systems, digital impression methods have become widespread, increasing patient comfort and eliminating errors related to material shrinkage and dimensional changes in laboratory processes. Studies in the literature demonstrate that the marginal and internal fit values of restorations produced with digital impression systems are within clinically acceptable limits (60-120 μm for marginal fit, 25-100 µm for internal fit) and generally yield similar or better results compared to conventional methods. Furthermore, the digital workflow prevents time loss by allowing the clinician to perform simultaneous evaluations and corrections in the clinical setting. In conclusion, the restorative materials and preferred impression methods used in all-ceramic systems directly affect adaptation, and digital systems offer a significant clinical advantage with high patient satisfaction and shortened procedural steps.
Referanslar
Heintze SD, Rousson V. Survival of zirconia-and metal-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review. International Journal of Prosthodontics, 2010; 23 (6), 493-502. PMID: 21209982.
Mjör IA, Moorhead JE, Dahl JE. Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice. International Dental Journal, 2000; 50 (6), 361-366. Doi: 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2000.tb00569.x
Hamalian TA, Nasr E, Chidiac JJ. Impression materials in fixed prosthodontics: Influence of choice on clinical procedure. Journal of Prosthodontics, 2011; 20 (2), 153-160. Doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00673.x
Çağlar İ, Duymuş ZY, Sabit A. Diş hekimliğinde kullanılan ölçü sistemlerinde güncel yaklaşımlar: Dijital ölçü. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, 2015; 25, 135-140. Doi: 10.17567/dfd.96167
Lawn BR, Deng Y, Lloyd IK, et al. Materials design of ceramic-based layer structures for crowns. Journal of Dental Research, 2002; 81 (6), 433-438. Doi: 10.1177/154405910208100615
Von Steyern PV, Carlson P, Nilner K. All‐ceramic fixed partial dentures designed according to the DC‐Zirkon® technique. A 2‐year clinical study. Journal of Oral Rehabilitaion, 2005; 32 (3), 180-187. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01437.x
Qualtrough A, Piddock V. Ceramics update. Journal of Dentistry, 1997; 25 (2), 91-95. Doi: 10.1016/s0300-5712(96)00018-8.
Ha SR. Biomechanical three-dimensional finite element analysis of monolithic zirconia crown with different cement type. Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, 2015; 7 (6), 475-483. Doi: 10.4047/jap.2015.7.6.475
Carames J, Tovar Suinaga L, Yu YCP, et al. Clinical advantages and limitations of monolithic zirconia restorations full arch implant supported reconstruction: Case series. International Journal of Dentistry, 2015; 2015, 392496. Doi: 10.1155/2015/392496
Zhang F, Vanmeensel K, Batuk M, et al. Highly-translucent, strong and aging-resistant 3Y-TZP ceramics for dental restoration by grain boundary segregation. Acta Biomaterialia, 2015; 16, 215-222. Doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.01.037
Chang JS, Ji W, Choi CH, et al. Catastrophic failure of a monolithic zirconia prosthesis. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2015; 113 (2), 86-90. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.07.016
Lameira DP, De Souza GM. Fracture strength of aged monolithic and bilayer zirconia-based crowns. BioMed Research International, 2015; 2015, 418641. Doi: 10.1155/2015/418641
Pihlaja J, Näpänkangas R, Raustia A. Outcome of zirconia partial fixed dental prostheses made by predoctoral dental students: A clinical retrospective study after 3 to 7 years of clinical service. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2016; 116 (1), 40-46. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.026
Azer SS, Drummond JL, Campbell SD. Influence of core buildup material on the fatigue strength of an all-ceramic crown. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2001; 86 (6), 624-631. Doi: 10.1067/mpr.2001.120656
Rosenstiel SF, Land MF. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics-e-book, ed., Elsevier Health Sciences, 2015.
Wildgoose DG, Johnson A, Winstanley RB. Glass/ceramic/refractory techniques, their development and introduction into dentistry: A historical literature review. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2004; 91 (2), 136-143. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.11.009
Ural Ç. Diş hekimliği pratiğinde tamamı seramik ve Cad-Cam uygulamaları. Dirim Tıp Gazetesi. 2011; 86 (1), 27-38.
Abduo J, Lyons K, Swain M. Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: A systematic review. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2010; 37 (11), 866-876. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02113.x.
Groten M, Axmann D, Pröbster L, et al. Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in vitro testing. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2000; 83 (1), 40-49. Doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70087-4.
Kokubo Y, Nagayama Y, Tsumita M, et al. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of In‐Ceram crowns fabricated using the GN‐I system. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2005; 32 (10), 753-758. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01506.x
Pelekanos S, Koumanou M, Koutayas SO, et al. Micro-CT evaluation of the marginal fit of different In-Ceram alumina copings. European Journal of Esthetic Dentistry 2009; 4 (3), 278-292. PMID: 19704928
Seo D, Yi Y, Roh B. The effect of preparation designs on the marginal and internal gaps in Cerec3 partial ceramic crowns. Journal of Dentistry, 2009; 37 (5), 374-382. Doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.01.008
Galhano GÁP, Pellizzer EP, Mazaro JVQ. Optical impression systems for CAD-CAM restorations. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 2012; 23 (6), e575-e579. Doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31826b8043
Pradíes G, Zarauz C, Valverde A, et al. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology. Journal of Dentistry, 2015; 43 (2), 201-208. Doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.12.007
Poticny DJ, Klim J. CAD/CAM in-office technology: innovations after 25 years for predictable, esthetic outcomes. Journal of American Dental Association, 2010; 141 (Suppl 2), 5S-9S. Doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0356
Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clinical Oral Investigations, 2013; 17 (7), 1759-1764. Doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0864-4
Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence International 2015; 46 (1), 9-17. Doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a32244.
Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, et al. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2015; 114 (4), 554-559. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.001
Sakornwimon N, Leevailoj C. Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients’ preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2017; 118 (3), 386-391. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.019
Malaguti G, Rossi R, Marziali B, et al. In vitro evaluation of prosthodontic impression on natural dentition: a comparison between traditional and digital techniques. Oral Implantology (Rome), 2017; 14 (Suppl 9), 21-27. Doi: 10.11138/orl/2016.9.1S.021
Shembesh M, Ali A, Finkelman M, et al. An in vitro comparison of the marginal adaptation accuracy of CAD/CAM restorations using different impression systems. Journal of Prosthodontics, 2017; 26 (7), 581-586. Doi: 10.1111/jopr.12446.
Ng J, Ruse D, Wyatt C. A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014; 112 (3), 555-560. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.002
Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, et al. Internal fit of pressed and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2015; 113 (4), 304-309. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.015
Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, et al. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. Journal of Prosthodontics, 2014; 23 (8), 610-617. Doi: 10.1111/jopr.12180
Riccitiello F, Amato M, Leone R, et al. In vitro evaluation of the marginal fit and internal adaptation of zirconia and lithium disilicate single crowns: micro-CT comparison between different manufacturing procedures. Open Dental Journal, 2018; 12, 160-172. Doi: 10.2174/1874210601812010160
Oğuz Eİ, Kılıçarslan MA, Ocak M, et al. Marginal and internal fit of feldspathic ceramic CAD/CAM crowns fabricated via different extraoral digitization methods: A micro-computed tomography analysis. Odontology, 2021;109 (2), 440-447. Doi: 10.1007/s10266-020-00560-6.
Ferrairo BM, Piras FF, Lima FF, et al. Comparison of marginal adaptation and internal fit of monolithic lithium disilicate crowns produced by 4 different CAD/CAM systems. Clinical Oral Investigations, 2021; 25 (4), 2029-2036. Doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03511-1.
Song TJ, Kwon TK, Yang JH, et al. Marginal fit of anterior 3-unit fixed partial zirconia restorations using different CAD/CAM systems. Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, 2013; 5 (3), 219-225. Doi: 10.4047/jap.2013.5.3.219
An S, Kim S, Choi H, et al. Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014; 112 (5), 1171-1175. Doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.024
