These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Marginal and internal fits of fixed dental prostheses zirconia retainers.
    Author: Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, Sorensen J.
    Journal: Dent Mater; 2009 Jan; 25(1):94-102. PubMed ID: 18620749.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: CAM (computer-aided manufacturing) and CAD (computer-aided design)/CAM systems facilitate the use of zirconia substructure materials for all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. This in vitro study compared the precision of fit of frameworks milled from semi-sintered zirconia blocks that were designed and machined with two CAD/CAM and one CAM system. METHODS: Three-unit posterior fixed dental prostheses (FDP) (n=10) were fabricated for standardized dies by: a milling center CAD/CAM system (Etkon), a laboratory CAD/CAM system (Cerec InLab), and a laboratory CAM system (Cercon). After adaptation by a dental technician, the FDP were cemented on definitive dies, embedded and sectioned. The marginal and internal fits were measured under an optical microscope at 50x magnification. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare data (alpha=0.05). RESULTS: The mean (S.D.) for the marginal fit and internal fit adaptation were: 29.1 microm (14.0) and 62.7 microm (18.9) for the milling center system, 56.6 microm (19.6) and 73.5 microm (20.6) for the laboratory CAD/CAM system, and 81.4 microm (20.3) and 119.2 microm (37.5) for the laboratory CAM system. One-way ANOVA showed significant differences between systems for marginal fit (P<0.001) and internal fit (P<0.001). SIGNIFICANCE: All systems showed marginal gaps below 120 microm and were therefore considered clinically acceptable. The CAD/CAM systems were more precise than the CAM system.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]