Abstract
Our aim in this follow-up in vitro study was to compare differences in marginal fit of inlays fabricated by CAD/CAM technique, using 2 different types of materials (one type of ceramic and one type of hybrid ceramic) and 2 different types of scanning: intraoral scanning (we use quotation marks because of the lack of a true intraoral environment) and model scanning, both performed on a Frasaco Typodont model. Marginal fit measurement was carried out with an electronic microscope at 1000x magnification. Our results proved to be better in the case of the ceramic we used, while model scanning proved to be more accurate than intraoral scanning. The best combination we obtained in terms of marginal fit was found when using ceramic and model scanning.
Highlights
IntroductionOur aim in this follow-up in vitro study was to compare differences in marginal fit of inlays fabricated by CAD/CAM technique, using 2 different types of materials (one type of ceramic and one type of hybrid ceramic) and 2 different types of scanning: intraoral scanning (we use quotation marks because of the lack of a true intraoral environment) and model scanning, both performed on a Frasaco Typodont model
Our aim in this follow-up in vitro study was to compare differences in marginal fit of inlays fabricated by CAD/CAM technique, using 2 different types of materials and 2 different types of scanning: intraoral scanning and model scanning, both performed on a Frasaco Typodont model
For intraoral scanning the best marginal fit value was obtained in the case of the Enamic hybrid ceramic on the mesial surface (2.33 microns)(fig. 5), while the worst was in case of the Empress CAD ceramic on the mesial surface (475.89 microns), but not on the marked area
Summary
Our aim in this follow-up in vitro study was to compare differences in marginal fit of inlays fabricated by CAD/CAM technique, using 2 different types of materials (one type of ceramic and one type of hybrid ceramic) and 2 different types of scanning: intraoral scanning (we use quotation marks because of the lack of a true intraoral environment) and model scanning, both performed on a Frasaco Typodont model. The best combination we obtained in terms of marginal fit was found when using ceramic and model scanning. Obtaining a model of good quality that true to its original is extremely important for the success of the treatment; different types of materials and impression techniques have been used over the years to achieve this desired accuracy [1]. Since the introduction of dental CAD/CAM systems, the adaptation of restorations may be improved by combining intraoral scanning and digital milling [2,3]. Marginal adaptation as it is sometimes referred to, is crucial for ceramic inlay restorations in order to avoid resin cement wear and plaque accumulation. The adaptation of a restoration is determined by measuring its marginal and internal gaps, which are important factors for the long-term clinical success [5-10]. Distortion as well as volumetric variations related to classic impression materials and cast stone properties are eliminated, simultaneously improving patient acceptance [11, 12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
