...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry >Fit of single tooth zirconia copings: comparison between various manufacturing processes.
【24h】

Fit of single tooth zirconia copings: comparison between various manufacturing processes.

机译:单齿氧化锆顶盖的配合:各种制造工艺之间的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Various CAD/CAM processes are commercially available to manufacture zirconia copings. Comparative data on their performance in terms of fit are needed. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the internal and marginal fit of single tooth zirconia copings manufactured with a CAD/CAM process (Procera; Nobel Biocare) and a mechanized manufacturing process (Ceramill; Amann Girrbach). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Abutments (n=20) prepared in vivo for ceramic crowns served as a template for manufacturing both Procera and Ceramill zirconia copings. Copings were manufactured and cemented (Clearfil Esthetic Cement; Kuraray) on epoxy replicas of stone cast abutments. Specimens were sectioned. Nine measurements were performed for each coping. Over- and under-extended margins were evaluated. Comparisons between the 2 processes were performed with a generalized linear mixed model (alpha=.05). RESULTS: Internal gap values between Procera and Ceramill groups were not significantly different (P=.13). The mean marginal gap (SD) for Procera copings (51(50) mum) was significantly smaller than for Ceramill (81(66) mum) (P<.005). The percentages of over- and under-extended margins were 43% and 57% for Procera respectively, and 71% and 29% for Ceramill. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the marginal fit of Procera copings was significantly better than that of Ceramill copings. Furthermore, Procera copings showed a smaller percentage of over-extended margins than did Ceramill copings.
机译:问题陈述:商业上可获得各种CAD / CAM工艺来制造氧化锆顶盖。需要关于适合度的性能比较数据。目的:这项体外研究的目的是比较采用CAD / CAM工艺(Procera; Nobel Biocare)和机械化生产工艺(Ceramill; Amann Girrbach)制造的单齿氧化锆顶盖的内部和边缘配合。材料和方法:体内制备的用于陶瓷冠的基台(n = 20)用作制造Procera和Ceramill氧化锆顶盖的模板。在石铸基台的环氧复制品上制造并粘接了顶盖(Clearfil Esthetic Cement;可乐丽)。标本被切成薄片。每次应对进行了九次测量。评估了超出和不足的边距。使用广义线性混合模型(alpha = .05)对2个过程进行比较。结果:Procera和Ceramill组之间的内部差距值没有显着差异(P = .13)。 Procera顶盖(51(50)妈妈)的平均边缘间隙(SD)显着小于Ceramill(81(66)妈妈)(P <.005)。 Procera的超额利润率和延伸不足的利润率分别为43%和57%,Ceramill的利润率分别为71%和29%。结论:在这项体外研究的局限性内,Procera顶盖的边缘拟合明显优于Ceramill顶盖的边缘拟合。此外,Procera应对措施的超额利润率比Ceramill应对措施低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号