Marginal gap measurement of ceramic single crowns before cementation: A systematic review

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.01.007
James Dudley BDS, MHSM, DClinDent(Pros), FPFA, FICD, MRACDS (Dr) , Taseef Hasan Farook BDS, MScDent, PhD
{"title":"Marginal gap measurement of ceramic single crowns before cementation: A systematic review","authors":"James Dudley BDS, MHSM, DClinDent(Pros), FPFA, FICD, MRACDS (Dr) ,&nbsp;Taseef Hasan Farook BDS, MScDent, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.01.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Statement of problem</h3><div>Different instruments have been used to measure the marginal gaps of crowns in vitro. However, a comprehensive systematic review is lacking.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the existing literature on the instruments used for the in vitro marginal gap measurement of ceramic single crowns before cementation and to determine whether the crown material and method of fabrication influenced the marginal gap.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>The search was conducted in 2024 across the EBSCO Host, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and predefined eligibility criteria. Eligible articles were screened to evaluate 6 instruments for measuring crown marginal gaps: direct view microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, impression replica, cross-sectioning, microcomputed tomography, and 3-dimensional (3D) superimposition. The normality of the data was assessed by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and the differences in mean marginal gap were statistically evaluated using the Welch ANOVA (α=.05).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ninety-two articles were included, with 77 documenting single measurement instruments and 15 using a combination of 2 or more measurement instruments. Direct view microscopy was the most used instrument and appeared in 31 (40%) of the studies. No significant differences in mean marginal gap (F=2.09, <em>P</em>=.077) were found across the 6 measurement instruments. Across all studies, excluding those using 3D superimposition, the mean ±standard deviation number of marginal gap measurements per crown was 34.3 ±50.6. Among the 77 studies using a single measurement instrument, 64 used computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology to fabricate the crowns. CAD-CAM crowns had a mean ±standard deviation marginal gap of 78.9 ±28.6 µm (n=64) compared with 71.6 ±29.5 µm (n=13) for crowns manufactured using conventional methods. Zirconia and lithium disilicate were the most researched materials. Zirconia crowns recorded a mean ±standard deviation marginal gap of 69.4 ±34.2 µm for 972 crowns, which was significantly different (<em>P</em>=.045) from lithium disilicate with a mean ±standard deviation marginal gap of 92.2 ±42.5 µm for 602 crowns.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Direct view microscopy was the most used marginal gap measurement instrument for ceramic single crowns before cementation, and CAD-CAM was the most used crown fabrication method. No significant differences in mean marginal gap were found among the 6 marginal gap measurement instruments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":"133 5","pages":"Pages 1145-1156"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002239132500040X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Statement of problem

Different instruments have been used to measure the marginal gaps of crowns in vitro. However, a comprehensive systematic review is lacking.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the existing literature on the instruments used for the in vitro marginal gap measurement of ceramic single crowns before cementation and to determine whether the crown material and method of fabrication influenced the marginal gap.

Material and methods

The search was conducted in 2024 across the EBSCO Host, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and predefined eligibility criteria. Eligible articles were screened to evaluate 6 instruments for measuring crown marginal gaps: direct view microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, impression replica, cross-sectioning, microcomputed tomography, and 3-dimensional (3D) superimposition. The normality of the data was assessed by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and the differences in mean marginal gap were statistically evaluated using the Welch ANOVA (α=.05).

Results

Ninety-two articles were included, with 77 documenting single measurement instruments and 15 using a combination of 2 or more measurement instruments. Direct view microscopy was the most used instrument and appeared in 31 (40%) of the studies. No significant differences in mean marginal gap (F=2.09, P=.077) were found across the 6 measurement instruments. Across all studies, excluding those using 3D superimposition, the mean ±standard deviation number of marginal gap measurements per crown was 34.3 ±50.6. Among the 77 studies using a single measurement instrument, 64 used computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology to fabricate the crowns. CAD-CAM crowns had a mean ±standard deviation marginal gap of 78.9 ±28.6 µm (n=64) compared with 71.6 ±29.5 µm (n=13) for crowns manufactured using conventional methods. Zirconia and lithium disilicate were the most researched materials. Zirconia crowns recorded a mean ±standard deviation marginal gap of 69.4 ±34.2 µm for 972 crowns, which was significantly different (P=.045) from lithium disilicate with a mean ±standard deviation marginal gap of 92.2 ±42.5 µm for 602 crowns.

Conclusions

Direct view microscopy was the most used marginal gap measurement instrument for ceramic single crowns before cementation, and CAD-CAM was the most used crown fabrication method. No significant differences in mean marginal gap were found among the 6 marginal gap measurement instruments.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
烤瓷单冠固接前边缘间隙测量:系统回顾。
问题说明:不同的仪器已经被用来测量体外冠的边缘间隙。然而,缺乏全面的系统评价。目的:本系统综述的目的是评估现有文献中用于陶瓷单冠固接前体外边缘间隙测量的仪器,并确定冠的材料和制作方法是否影响边缘间隙。材料和方法:检索于2024年在EBSCO主机、Scopus、PubMed和Web of Science数据库中进行,遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南和预定义的资格标准。筛选符合条件的文章,评估6种测量冠边缘间隙的仪器:直接观察显微镜、扫描电子显微镜、印模复制、横切、微计算机断层扫描和三维(3D)叠加。采用Kolmogorov-Smirnov检验检验资料的正态性,采用Welch方差分析评估平均边际差距的差异(α= 0.05)。结果:纳入92篇文献,其中77篇文献采用单一测量仪器,15篇文献采用两种或两种以上测量仪器的组合。直接显微镜是使用最多的仪器,在31例(40%)的研究中出现。6种测量工具的平均边际间隙无显著差异(F=2.09, P= 0.077)。在所有研究中,不包括使用3D叠加的研究,每个冠边缘间隙测量的平均值±标准差数为34.3±50.6。在使用单一测量仪器的77项研究中,64项研究使用计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造(CAD-CAM)技术来制作冠。CAD-CAM冠的平均±标准差边际间隙为78.9±28.6µm (n=64),而传统方法冠的平均±标准差边际间隙为71.6±29.5µm (n=13)。氧化锆和二硅酸锂是研究最多的材料。氧化锆冠972个冠的平均±标准差边缘间隙为69.4±34.2µm,与二硅酸锂冠602个冠的平均±标准差边缘间隙为92.2±42.5µm有显著性差异(P= 0.045)。结论:直接显微镜是烤瓷单冠固接前最常用的边缘间隙测量仪器,CAD-CAM是烤瓷单冠最常用的制作方法。6种边际间隙测量工具的平均边际间隙无显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
13.00%
发文量
599
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.
期刊最新文献
Do color stability and translucency differ between 3D printed and milled resin-based fixed dental restorations? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dimensional accuracy and internal fit of anterior 3-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated by additive and subtractive manufacturing using polymer-based and ceramic restorative materials. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of complete arch implant scanning techniques performed extraorally: Reverse impression and extraoral photogrammetry methods. Report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. Response to Letter to the Editor on the Manuscript, "Comparing the performance of ChatGPT 4o, DeepSeek R1, and Gemini 2 Pro in answering fixed prosthodontics questions over time". Effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength between light-polymerized hard chairside relining material and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) milled denture base materials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1