Back to Search Start Over

The Impact of Open versus Closed Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Systems on the Marginal Gap of Zirconia-Reinforced Lithium Silicate Single Crowns Evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscopy: A Comparative In Vitro Study

Authors :
Asaf Shely
Joseph Nissan
Ofir Rosner
Eran Zenziper
Diva Lugassy
Khadija Abidulkrem
Gil Ben-Izhack
Source :
Journal of Functional Biomaterials, Vol 15, Iss 5, p 130 (2024)
Publication Year :
2024
Publisher :
MDPI AG, 2024.

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the impact of CAD/CAM closed systems and open systems on the marginal gap of monolithic zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) ceramic crowns, as both systems are used in everyday dentistry, both chair-side and laboratory. For the closed system, 20 plastic teeth were scanned by a Primescan intra-oral scanner (IOS), and for the open system, the same number of plastic teeth were scanned by Trios 4 IOS. For the closed system, CEREC software was used, and for the open system, EXOCAD software was used. All 40 ZLS crowns were grinded by the same four-axis machine and cemented with Temp-bond, followed by self-adhesive resin cement. For each type of cement, an evaluation of the marginal gap was conducted by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Before comparisons between the groups, a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was performed on the study variables showing a normal distribution (p > 0.05). Independent T tests (α = 0.05) and paired-sample T tests (α = 0.05) were used. The independent T test found no significant mean marginal gap differences in the zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate crowns bonded with Temp-bond and scanned by Primescan (28.09 μm ± 3.06) compared to Trios 4 (28.94 μm ± 3.30) (p = 0.401), and there was no significant mean marginal gap differences in zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate crowns bonded with self-adhesive resin cement (Gcem ONE) and scanned by Primescan (46.70 μm ± 3.80) compared to Trios 4 (47.79 μm ± 2.59) (p = 0.295). Paired-sample T tests showed significantly higher mean marginal gaps with Gcem ONE compared to Temp-bond for the total mean marginal gap when scanning with Primescan (p = 0.0005) or Trios 4 (p = 0.0005). In everyday dentistry, both closed systems (Primescan with Cerec) and open systems (Trios 4 with Exocad) can be used to achieve an acceptable (® DUO single crowns. There is a significant difference between cementation with Temp-bond and Gcem ONE self-adhesive resin cement (p < 0.05).

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
15050130 and 20794983
Volume :
15
Issue :
5
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Journal of Functional Biomaterials
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.2eb090fece8745528894c22611157ff9
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb15050130