Cargando…
A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner
BACKGROUND: Intraoral scanners have been developing during last years. The aim of this study was to know if digital impressions achieve a marginal adaptation in overlays as well as conventional impressions with silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-two extracted molars were selected. The samples wer...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medicina Oral S.L.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8106928/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33981394 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.58140 |
_version_ | 1783689859471245312 |
---|---|
author | García-Cuesta, Carla Faus-Llácer, Vicente Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Botello-Torres, René Faus-Matoses, Vicente |
author_facet | García-Cuesta, Carla Faus-Llácer, Vicente Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Botello-Torres, René Faus-Matoses, Vicente |
author_sort | García-Cuesta, Carla |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Intraoral scanners have been developing during last years. The aim of this study was to know if digital impressions achieve a marginal adaptation in overlays as well as conventional impressions with silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-two extracted molars were selected. The samples were prepared for MOD overlays. The teeth were divided into two groups (n=31). Group 1: impressions were made with silicone (Express™ Impression, 3M ESPE) and overlays were manufactured with Sinfony composite (3M ESPE) by the laboratory technician. Group 2: impressions were taken with the scanner True Definition (TD, 3M ESPE) and under Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM Restorative composite (3M ESPE) were produced the restorations. Under 32x magnification images of vestibular, lingual, mesial and distal were capture in all the samples. Then the fit of the restorations was evaluated before and after cementation. Data were analysed statistically applying ANOVA and Bonferroni test. RESULTS: The marginal gap was better in TD group before (169,76 ± 54,15 µm) and after (145,16 ± 57,89 µm) cementation than in the silicone group (190,89 ± 58,18 µm) (187,47 ± 81,29 µm). The lowest marginal gap was in oclusal surface and the higher value was in the proximal margin for all the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Digital impressions regarding marginal adaptation achieve better results than conventional impressions. Key words:Composite onlays, overlays, restorative, CAD/CAM, intraoral scanner, silicone impressions, marginal adaptation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8106928 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Medicina Oral S.L. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81069282021-05-11 A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner García-Cuesta, Carla Faus-Llácer, Vicente Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Botello-Torres, René Faus-Matoses, Vicente J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: Intraoral scanners have been developing during last years. The aim of this study was to know if digital impressions achieve a marginal adaptation in overlays as well as conventional impressions with silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-two extracted molars were selected. The samples were prepared for MOD overlays. The teeth were divided into two groups (n=31). Group 1: impressions were made with silicone (Express™ Impression, 3M ESPE) and overlays were manufactured with Sinfony composite (3M ESPE) by the laboratory technician. Group 2: impressions were taken with the scanner True Definition (TD, 3M ESPE) and under Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM Restorative composite (3M ESPE) were produced the restorations. Under 32x magnification images of vestibular, lingual, mesial and distal were capture in all the samples. Then the fit of the restorations was evaluated before and after cementation. Data were analysed statistically applying ANOVA and Bonferroni test. RESULTS: The marginal gap was better in TD group before (169,76 ± 54,15 µm) and after (145,16 ± 57,89 µm) cementation than in the silicone group (190,89 ± 58,18 µm) (187,47 ± 81,29 µm). The lowest marginal gap was in oclusal surface and the higher value was in the proximal margin for all the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Digital impressions regarding marginal adaptation achieve better results than conventional impressions. Key words:Composite onlays, overlays, restorative, CAD/CAM, intraoral scanner, silicone impressions, marginal adaptation. Medicina Oral S.L. 2021-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8106928/ /pubmed/33981394 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.58140 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Medicina Oral S.L. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research García-Cuesta, Carla Faus-Llácer, Vicente Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Botello-Torres, René Faus-Matoses, Vicente A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
title | A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
title_full | A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
title_fullStr | A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
title_short | A comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
title_sort | comparison of the marginal adaptation of composite overlays fabricated with silicone and an intraoral scanner |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8106928/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33981394 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.58140 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garciacuestacarla acomparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT fausllacervicente acomparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT zubizarretamachoalvaro acomparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT botellotorresrene acomparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT fausmatosesvicente acomparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT garciacuestacarla comparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT fausllacervicente comparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT zubizarretamachoalvaro comparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT botellotorresrene comparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner AT fausmatosesvicente comparisonofthemarginaladaptationofcompositeoverlaysfabricatedwithsiliconeandanintraoralscanner |