Marginal Gap Evaluation of Metal Onlays and Resin Nanoceramic Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing Blocks Onlays

Abstract

Objective This study was carried out to assess and compare the marginal gap of conventionally used metal onlays and new resin nanoceramic (RNC) (Lava Ultimate block) onlays.

Materials and Methods This is an in vitro study using two extracted sound human mandibular molars. One tooth was prepared to receive the metal onlays and another one for the RNC onlays which were fabricated using the computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology. Twelve metals and 12 ceramic onlays were fabricated before they were placed at their respective preparation and examined under the Leica stereomicroscope, M125C (Leica Microsystems, Wetzlar, Germany) for a marginal analysis. The gap width was measured at 10 predefined landmarks which included 3 points on the buccal and lingual surfaces each and 2 points each on the mesial and distal surfaces, respectively.

Statistical Analysis Mann–Whitney post hoc test was used for statistical analysis (P ≤ 0.05).

Results Overall, the RNC onlays showed significant lower marginal gap with the exception of the landmarks 5 and 6 (on distolingual) and no significant difference at landmark 7 (on midlingual). It was observed that the marginal gap were all within the clinically acceptable limit of 120 μm.

Conclusions Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that the RNC CAD/CAM onlays are a promising alternative to the metal onlays.

Keywords

ceramics - computer-aided design - microleakage - minimally invasive dentistry - prosthetic dentistry/prosthodontics - restorative materials

• References

• 1 Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 62 (04) 405-408
• 2 Addi S, Hedayati-Khams A, Poya A, Sjögren G. Interface gap size of manually and CAD/CAM-manufactured ceramic inlays/onlays in vitro. J Dent 2002; 30 (01) 53-58
• 3 Abduo J, Lyons K, Swain M. Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37 (11) 866-876
• 4 Groten M, Axmann D, Pröbster L, Weber H. Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in-vitro testing. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83 (01) 40-49
• 5 McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 1971; 131 (03) 107-111
• 6 Rastogi A, Kamble V. Comparative analysis of the clinical techniques used in evaluation of marginal accuracy of cast restoration using stereomicroscopy as gold standard. J Adv Prosthodont 2011; 3 (02) 69-75
• 7 Lofstrom LH, Barakat MM. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of clinically cemented cast gold restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 61 (06) 664-669
• 8 Martínez-Rus F, Suárez MJ, Rivera B, Pradíes G. Evaluation of the absolute marginal discrepancy of zirconia-based ceramic copings. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105 (02) 108-114
• 9 Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Brackett SE. Learning. Fundamentals of Fixed Prosthodontics. 3rd ed.. Vol. 10. University of Michigan, USA: US Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc; 1997: 40
• 10 Kelly JR, Benetti P. Ceramic materials in dentistry: historical evolution and current practice. Aust Dent J 2011; 56 (Suppl. 01) 84-96
• 11 3M ESPE. Technical Product Profile: Lava™ Ultimate CAD CAM Restorative. 3M ESPE; USA: 2012
• 12 Richter WA, Ueno H. Relationship of crown margin placement to gingival inflammation. J Prosthet Dent 1973; 30 (02) 156-161
• 13 Felton DA, Kanoy BE, Bayne SC, Wirthman GP. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65 (03) 357-364
• 14 Seymour JG. A simplified technique for the tooth preparation of onlay castings. J Prosthet Dent 1987; 57 (01) 9-11
• 15 da Costa JB, Pelogia F, Hagedorn B, Ferracane JL. Evaluation of different methods of optical impression making on the marginal gap of onlays created with CEREC 3D. Oper Dent 2010; 35 (03) 324-329
• 16 Nawafleh NA, Mack F, Evans J, Mackay J, Hatamleh MM. Accuracy and reliability of methods to measure marginal adaptation of crowns and FDPs: a literature review. J Prosthodont 2013; 22 (05) 419-428
• 17 Fransson B, Oilo G, Gjeitanger R. The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1985; 1 (05) 197-199
• 18 Assif D, Antopolski B, Helft M, Kaffe I. Comparison of methods of clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of complete cast gold crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 54 (01) 20-24
• 19 Anusavice KJ, Phillips RW, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillips’ Science of Dental Materials. 12th ed.. USA: Elsevier/Saunders; 2013
• 20 Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent 2004; 29 (05) 481-508
• 21 Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008; 204 (09) 505-511
• 22 Christensen GJ. Marginal fit of gold inlay castings. J Prosthet Dent 1966; 16 (02) 297-305
• 23 Reich S, Gozdowski S, Trentzsch L, Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U. Marginal fit of heat-pressed vs. CAD/CAM processed all-ceramic onlays using a milling unit prototype. Oper Dent 2008; 33 (06) 644-650