The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 24 , ISSUE 11 ( November, 2023 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Assessment of Marginal and Internal Adaptation in Provisional Crowns Utilizing Three Distinct Materials

Ezatollah Jalalian, Farzan Younesi, Shaghayegh Golalipour, Sotude Khorshidi, Seyed Hamed Mahdavisaedabadi, Maryam Sayyari

Keywords : Composite resins, Computer-aided design, Crowns, Dental marginal adaptation, Polymethyl methacrylate

Citation Information : Jalalian E, Younesi F, Golalipour S, Khorshidi S, Mahdavisaedabadi SH, Sayyari M. Assessment of Marginal and Internal Adaptation in Provisional Crowns Utilizing Three Distinct Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023; 24 (11):853-858.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3589

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 11-01-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to assess the marginal and internal adaptation of provisional crowns fabricated from polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) blocks by the computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system, autopolymerizing PMMA, and acrylic base composite resin. Materials and methods: In this in vitro experimental study, a brass die was obtained, and provisional crowns were fabricated in three groups using Teliocad PMMA blocks by the CAD/CAM system, Tempron GC auto-polymerizing PMMA, and Bisico acrylic base composite resin (n = 7 in each group). The provisional crowns were coded and randomly placed on the die. Their marginal adaptation was evaluated under a stereomicroscope at 40× magnification, while their internal adaptation was assessed by the replica technique. Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (α = 0.05). Results: The mean marginal gap was the highest in autopolymerizing PMMA and the lowest in the CAD/CAM PMMA group (p < 0.05). The mean marginal gap in the autopolymerizing PMMA group was significantly higher than that in the resin material (p = 0.014) and CAD/CAM PMMA (p = 0.000) groups. The difference between the resin material and CAD/CAM PMMA groups was not significant (p = 0.13). The mean internal gap was the highest in autopolymerizing PMMA group and the lowest in CAD/CAM PMMA group (p < 0.05). The mean internal gap in autopolymerizing PMMA group was significantly higher than that in composite resin (p = 0.002) and CAD/CAM PMMA (p = 0.00) groups. The difference between the resin material and CAD/CAM PMMA groups was not significant (p = 0.322). Conclusion: Computer-aided design/Computer-aided manufacturing PMMA provisional crowns showed the highest marginal and internal adaptation followed by acrylic base resin material crowns. Clinical significance: Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing PMMA crowns demonstrate superior marginal and internal adaptation compared with autopolymerizing PMMA and acrylic base composite resin crowns, suggesting CAD/CAM technology's potential for enhancing clinical outcomes.


HTML PDF Share
  1. Pereira ÍF, Lima EM. Evaluation of the marginal accuracy of provisional restorations made of acrylic resins. Braz J Oral Sci 2019:e191404.
  2. Field J, Wassell R. Provisional restorations. In: Wassell R, editor. Extra-Coronal Restorations. Springer; 2019. pp. 395–420.
  3. Monzavi A, Zarati S, Jafarzadeh T, et al. Comparison of some properties of four provisional restorations resin: Trim, Tempron, Acropars TRII & Duralay (Aria Dent). J Dent Med 2006;19(3):35–44. Available from: http://jdm.tums.ac.ir/article-1-259-en.html.
  4. Rai R, Kumar SA, Prabhu R, et al. Evaluation of marginal and internal gaps of metal ceramic crowns obtained from conventional impressions and casting techniques with those obtained from digital techniques. Indian J Dent Res 2017;28(3):291–297. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_81_17.
  5. Ehrenberg DS, Weiner S. Changes in marginal gap size of provisional resin crowns after occlusal loading and thermal cycling. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84(2):139–148. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2000.108027.
  6. Rathi S, Verma A. Material selection for single-tooth crown restorations. In: Applications of Nanocomposite Materials in Dentistry. Woodhead Publishing; 2019. pp. 256–268.
  7. Young HM, Smith CT, Morton D. Comparative in vitro evaluation of two provisional restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85(2): 129–132. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2001.112797.
  8. Keyf F, Anil N. The effect of margin design on the marginal adaptation of temporary crowns. J Oral Rehabil 1994;21(4):367–371. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1994.tb01151.x.
  9. Kozmacs C, Baumann V, Bunz O, et al. Relative clinical success of bis-acryl composite provisional crowns. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2018;39(1):e9–e12. PMID: 29293015.
  10. David R. Function placement and reproduction of bevel for gold casting. J Prosthet Dent 1963;13(6):1160–1166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(63)90268-3.
  11. Davis S, Kelly J, Campbell S. Use of an elastomeric material to improve the occlusal seat and marginal seal of cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62(3):288–291. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90334-x.
  12. Donovan T, Prince J. An analysis of margin configurations for metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53(2):153–157. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(85)90097-6.
  13. Henry P, Harnist D. Dimensional stability and accuracy of rubber impression materials. Aust Dent J 1974;19(3):162–166. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1974.tb05033.x.
  14. Gardner FM. Margins of complete crowns-literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1982;48(4):396–400. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(82) 90072-5.
  15. Seifi M, Ghahramanloo A, Moayed M. A comparative study of marginal adaptation of crowns fabricated from two provisional materials, after occlusal loading and thermocycling. J Mashhad Dent School 2008;32(2):129–136. DOI: 10.22038/JMDS.2008.1325.
  16. Robinson FB, Hovijitra S. Marginal fit of direct temporary crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1982;47(4):390–392. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(82) 80087-5.
  17. Abdullah AO, Tsitrou EA, Pollington S. Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns. J Appl Oral Sci 2016;24(3):258–263. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720150451.
  18. Dureja I, Yadav B, Malhotra P, et al. A comparative evaluation of vertical marginal fit of provisional crowns fabricated by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technique and direct (intraoral technique) and flexural strength of the materials: An in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2018;18(4):314–320. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_306_17.
  19. Jianming Y, Ying T, Feng P, et al. Comparative evaluation of the marginal accuracy of single crowns fabricated computer using aided design/computer aided manufacturing methods, self-curing resin and Luxatemp. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2016;34(6):575–578. DOI: 10.7518/hxkq.2016.06.005.
  20. Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, et al. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62(4):405–408. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90170-4.
  21. Amin BM, Aras MA, Chitre V. A comparative evaluation of the marginal accuracy of crowns fabricated from four commercially available provisional materials: An in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent 2015;6(2):161–165. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.156035.
  22. Schwantz JK, Oliveira-Ogliari A, Meereis CT, et al. Characterization of bis-acryl composite resins for provisional restorations. Braz Dent J 2017;28(3):354–361. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201601418.
  23. Zafar MS. Prosthodontic applications of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA): An update. Polymers 2020;12(10):2299. DOI: 10.3390/polym12102299.
  24. Madhavan S, Jude SM, Achammada S, et al. Comparison of marginal accuracy of interim restoration fabricated from self-cure composite and autopolymerizing acrylic resin: An in vitro study. J Pharm Bioallied Sci 2020;12(Suppl 1):S361–S366. DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_106_20.
  25. Peng CC, Chung KH, Yau HT, et al. Assessment of the internal fit and marginal integrity of interim crowns made by different manufacturing methods. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123(3):514–522. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.02.024.
  26. Peng CC, Chung KH, Ramos V Jr. Assessment of the adaptation of interim crowns using different measurement techniques. J Prosthodont 2020;29(1):87–93. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13122.
  27. Abdullah AO, Pollington S, Liu Y. Comparison between direct chairside and digitally fabricated temporary crowns. Dent Mater J 2018;37(6):957–963. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2017-315.
  28. Kelvin Khng KY, Ettinger RL, Armstrong SR, et al. In vitro evaluation of the marginal integrity of CAD/CAM interim crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115(5):617–623. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.002.
  29. Yao J, Li J, Wang Y, et al. Comparison of the flexural strength and marginal accuracy of traditional and CAD/CAM interim materials before and after thermal cycling. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(3):649–657. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.01.012.
  30. Elagra MI, Rayyan MR, Alhomaidhi MM, et al. Color stability and marginal integrity of interim crowns: An in vitro study. Eur J Dent 2017;11(3):330–334. DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_66_17.
  31. Burns DR, Beck DA, Nelson SK, et al. A review of selected dental literature on contemporary provisional fixed prosthodontic treatment: Report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90(5):474–497. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(03)00259-2.
  32. Sampaio CS, Niemann KD, Schweitzer DD, et al. Microcomputed tomography evaluation of cement film thickness of veneers and crowns made with conventional and 3D printed provisional materials. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(3):487–495. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12651.
  33. Park JY, Jeong ID, Lee JJ, et al. In vitro assessment of the marginal and internal fits of interim implant restorations fabricated with different methods. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116(4):536–542. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.03.012.
  34. Wu J, Xie H, Sadr A, et al. Evaluation of internal fit and marginal adaptation of provisional crowns fabricated with three different techniques. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 2021;21(3):740. DOI: 10.3390/s21030740.
  35. Aldahian N, Khan R, Mustafa M, et al. Influence of conventional, CAD-CAM, and 3D printing fabrication techniques on the marginal integrity and surface roughness and wear of interim crowns. Appl Sci 2021;11(19):8964. DOI: 10.3390/app11198964.
  36. Al-Humood H, Alfaraj A, Yang CC, et al. Marginal fit, mechanical properties, and esthetic outcomes of CAD/CAM interim fixed dental prostheses (FDPs): A systematic review. Materials 2023;16(5):1996. DOI: 10.3390/ma16051996.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.