Methods: A master model was developed with a crown preparation (tooth #14) and an occlusal stop distal to the preparation (Distal Stop) and adjacent crown preparations (teeth #2 and #3) with no occlusal stop distal to the preparations (Distal Extension). For each test group, the maxillary and mandibular teeth were scanned with a CEREC AC (Sirona Dental Systems) to create ten independent data files. One group for each crown preparation used a bite registration scanning technique and another group used the buccal bite scanning technique to virtually align the models for the crown design. Each file was used to design and mill a ceramic crown (IPS Empress CAD/Ivoclar) that was seated on the master model with a silicon material. The vertical dimension was recorded with a polyvinylsiloxane bite registration material to measure variation from the control model. The bite registration was sectioned mesiodistally and measured in cross-section at 20X using a measuring microscope and 3D software program.
Results:
Occlusal vertical dimension (microns) |
Distal Extension |
Distal Stop |
Master (control) |
3125.12+28.95 a |
3032.17+12.08 a |
Bite Registration Scan |
3279.52+69.41 b |
3175.06+53.08 b |
Buccal Bite Scan |
3104.37+35.91 a |
3048.51+44.86 a |
The data was analyzed using a two-way ANOVA and significant differences were determined with a Tukey test (p<0.05). Letters indicate significantly different groups.
Conclusions:
There was no significant difference in the occlusal vertical dimension between the master model and the crowns made with the buccal bite scan technique. There was a significant difference in the occlusal vertical dimension between the master model and the crowns made with the bite registration scanning technique. The buccal bite scanning technique resulted in a more accurate occlusal mounting compared to the bite registration technique.
Keywords: CAD/CAM, Computers, Effectiveness, Occlusion and Technology
See more of: Dental Materials 10: Instruments and Equipment