Clinical performance of CAD-CAM partial-coverage restorations: Experienced versus less-experienced operators

摘要

Statement of problem. Less-experienced operators have been shown to require additional training to achieve results similar to those of experienced operators. However, clinical data comparing the survival and success of ceramic restorations by experienced and less-experienced operators by using the computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology are lacking. Purpose. The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to analyze and compare the clinical performance of CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations fabricated by less-experienced (predoctoral dental students) and experienced (dentists) operators. Material and methods. Patients who received an adhesively luted CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restoration between 2011 and 2019 were included in the study. Clinical performance was assessed by calibrated examiners by using World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Success and survival were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and statistically compared by log-rank tests and univariate Cox regression analyses. FDI criteria were compared by using Mann-Whitney-U tests (a=.05). Results. Ninety-two restorations (students: n=65, dentists: n=27) were assessed (mean +/- standard deviation time from insertion: 4.04 +/- 1.55 years). The survival rates after 2 years (students: 93.8, mean annual failure rate mAFR: 3.1; dentist: 96.3, mAFR: 1.9) and after 4 years (students: 87.3, mAFR: 3.3; dentists: 88.3, mAFR: 3.1) were not significantly different (P=.525). Also, success rates after 2 (students: 90.8, mAFR: 4.7; dentists: 92.6, mAFR: 3.8) and 4 years (students: 82.4, mAFR: 4.7; dentists: 76.1, mAFR: 6.6) were not significantly different (P=.778). FDI criteria were also not significantly different between less-experienced and experienced operators (P>.110). Conclusions. Operator experience did not affect the short-term clinical performance of CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations. (J Prosthet Dent 2022;128:1245-51)