Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Nov;23(11):4043-4050.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-02840-0. Epub 2019 Feb 22.

Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression-a split-mouth randomised clinical study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression-a split-mouth randomised clinical study

Yasser Haddadi et al. Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Nov.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this prospective in vivo study was to evaluate the accuracy of the marginal and internal fit of crowns based on conventional impression (CI) or intraoral scan (IOS) in a randomised, split-mouth set-up.

Materials and methods: Nineteen patients needing full coverage crowns, fitting a split-mouth design, were provided with two lithium disilicate crowns: one based on a CI and one based on an IOS. The marginal and internal accuracy of the crowns were assessed with the replica technique and clinically using a modified California Dental Association (CDA) quality evaluation system.

Results: At the preparation margin, the median gap was 60 μm for IOS and 78 μm for CI. For the other points, the median gap ranged from 91 to 159 μm for IOS and 109 to 181 μm for CI. The accuracy of the IOS was statistically significantly better at all point except at the cusp tip. All crowns where rated R or S at both the 6- and 12-month follow-up appointments. The results for the clinical evaluation with CDA for marginal integrity showed no statistically significant difference between the two impression methods at both the 6- and 12-month evaluations.

Conclusions: Crowns based on IOS show statistically significantly better marginal and internal adaptation before cementation compared to conventional impression. However, the clinical evaluation showed similar marginal adaptation.

Clinical relevance: Crowns based on a fully digital workflow can provide clinically acceptable marginal adaptation, comparable to crowns based on CI.

Keywords: CAD/CAM; Clinical accuracy; Dental crown; Dental impression technique; Digital impression; Intraoral scanning.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. J Appl Oral Sci. 2016 Jan-Feb;24(1):85-94 - PubMed
    1. Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Mar;21(2):579-587 - PubMed
    1. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Dec;27(12):e185-e189 - PubMed
    1. Dent Mater J. 2017 Jan 31;36(1):27-34 - PubMed
    1. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Sep;116(3):362-7 - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources