The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2014 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Internal Fit between Implant Abutments and Cast Metal Crowns vs Laser-sintered Crowns

Mehmet Ali Kiliçarslan, Pelin Özkan, Bülent Uludag, Emre Mumcu

Citation Information : Kiliçarslan MA, Özkan P, Uludag B, Mumcu E. Comparison of Internal Fit between Implant Abutments and Cast Metal Crowns vs Laser-sintered Crowns. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014; 15 (4):428-432.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1557

Published Online: 01-08-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2014; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

A common problem related to cemented single crowns is the internal misfit, which may cause inadequate retention, especially when seated on the implant abutment. The aim of this study was to compare the internal fit of Co-Cr crowns using a traditional lost-wax casting technique from laser-sintered Co-Cr alloy crowns.

Materials and methods

Twelve metallic crowns per each technique were fabricated. The effect of the thickness of cement, originated internal gap was evaluated. Crowns were cemented on the implant abutments with resin cement, and the internal fit of crowns was measured at five areas with an optical microscope. The data were analyzed, and the means were compared with a t-test (p<0.05).

Results

The internal gap width measurements for the lasersintered group (min. 52.19 ± 11.61 µm and max. 140.01 ± 31.84 µm) indicated the presence of a significantly closed internal gap compared to the crowns obtained through the lost wax method (min. 65.50 ± 9.54 µm and max. 313.46 ± 48.12 µm).

Conclusion

The fit of the metal crown likely varies with the fabrication technique. The use of techniques that enable the adjustment of crown parameters, such as the laser sintering technique, maintains the desired fit between casting and implant abutments.

Clinical significance

This study investigated which technique affects the internal fit of cemented implant-supported crowns, comparing the use of lost wax casting and laser-sintered metal dental alloys. The results of this study indicate that the use of laser-sintered crowns can improve for crown accuracy.

How to cite this article

Kiliçarslan MA, Özkan P, Uludag B, Mumcu E. Comparison of Internal Fit between Implant Abutments and Cast Metal Crowns vs Laser-sintered Crowns. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(4):428-432.


PDF Share
  1. In vitro vertical misfit evaluation of cast frameworks for cement-retained implant-supported pertial prostheses. J Dent 2009;37(1):52-58.
  2. Dental implant prosthetics. St Louis: Elsevier Mosby; 2005, p. 414.
  3. Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13(4):343-348.
  4. Retention of luting agents on implant abutments of different height and taper. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16(5):594-598.
  5. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9(2):117-130.
  6. Effect of surface topography of implant abutments on retention of cemented single-tooth crowns. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010;30(4):409-413.
  7. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73(1):49-54.
  8. Influence of finish line design on marginal adaptation of electroformed metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2006;95(3):237-242.
  9. Comparison of the marginal fit of pressable ceramic to metal ceramic restorations. J Prosthodont 2009;18(8):645-648.
  10. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96(1):47-52.
  11. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of zirconia all-ceramic crowns. J Prosthodont Res 2011;55(1):40-43.
  12. Quintessence Int 2009;40(9):745-752.
  13. The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2011;27(4):356-363.
  14. Dent Mater 2008;24(10):1311-1315.
  15. Cement thickness at implant-supported single-tooth Lava assemblies: a scanning electron microscopic investigation. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010;21(7):747-750.
  16. Influence of finish-line geometry on the fit of crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6(1):25-30.
  17. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26(7):582-593.
  18. The effect of film thickness and surface texture on the resistance of cemented extracoronal restorations to lateral fatigue loading. Int J Prosthodont 1999;12(3):255-262.
  19. The relationship between open margins and margin designs on full cast crowns made by commercial dental laboratories. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53(4):463-466.
  20. Evaluation of the marginal fit of a zirconia ceramic computer-aided machined (CAM) crown system. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104(4):216-227.
  21. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65(3):357-364.
  22. Marginal and internal fit of all-ceramic CAD/CAM crown-copings on chamfer preparations. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32(6):441-447.
  23. In vitro marginal fit of three all-ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90(5):459-464.
  24. Microbial leakage and marginal fit of the implant-abutment interface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12(4):527-240.
  25. Biofilm on dental implants: a review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24(4):616-626.
  26. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 1971;131(3):107-111.
  27. Marginal accuracy and geometry of cast titanium copings. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67(4):435-440.
  28. Internal fit evaluation of crowns prepared using a new dental crown fabrication technique: Laser-sintered Co-Cr crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102(4):253-259.
  29. Phillips’ science of dental materials. 11th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2003. pp. 565, 584, 585.
  30. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. St. Louis: The C.V. Mosby; 1988. pp. 360, 365,476.
  31. Comparison of the bond strength of laser-sintered and cast base metal dental alloys to porcelain. Dent Mater 2008;24(10):1400-1404.
  32. Clinical outcome of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with laser-sintering technology. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24(1):46-48.
  33. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32(10):753-758.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.