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: Additive or subtractive manufacturing of crown patterns used for pressing or casting: A trueness analysis.
    Author: Çakmak G, Donmez MB, Cuellar AR, Kahveci Ç, Schimmel M, Yilmaz B.
    Journal: J Dent; 2022 Sep; 124():104221. PubMed ID: 35820503.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of subtractive and additive manufacturing techniques on the trueness of crown patterns used for pressing or casting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A complete-coverage mandibular right first molar crown was designed in standard tessellation language (STL) format. This STL served as the control (C-STL) and was used to fabricate 30 crown patterns in 3D-printed resin (PR, ProArt Print Wax), millable wax suitable for casting (BW, ProArt CAD Wax Blue), and millable wax suitable for pressing (YW, ProArt CAD Wax Yellow) (n = 10). Subtractively manufactured patterns were fabricated by using a 5-axis milling unit (PrograMill PM7), while 3D-printed patterns were fabricated by using a digital light processing-based 3D printer (PrograPrint PR5; Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein). All fabricated patterns were digitized by using an intraoral scanner (CEREC Primescan SW 5.2) to generate test-STLs. C-STL and test-STLs were transferred into a 3D analysis software (Medit Link v 2.4.4). Trueness evaluation was performed at 4 different surfaces (external, intaglio with margin, marginal, and intaglio without margin) and for complete scan meshes (overall) by using the root mean square (RMS) method. Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (α = .05). RESULTS: RMS values varied significantly at all surfaces (P < .001), except for marginal surface (P = .151). PR had the highest RMS values at external surface (P ≤ .007), intaglio surfaces (with (P ≤ .003) and without margin (P ≤ .005)), and overall (P ≤ .01). No significant differences were observed between YW and BW (P ≥ .223). CONCLUSION: Patterns fabricated by using subtractive manufacturing exhibited high trueness. The deviation values, in general, were small, particularly at intaglio and marginal surfaces; thus, clinical difference in crown-fit may be negligible using additive or subtractive technique. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The fit of definitive crowns may be similar when tested crown patterns are additively or subtractively manufactured. However, crowns fabricated by using tested 3D-printed resin patterns may require more chairside adjustments compared with those fabricated by using subtractively manufactured wax patterns.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]