Marginal and internal fit of crowns based on additive or subtractive manufacturing

References

• van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012;28(1):3–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahlholm P, Sipila K, Vallittu P, et al. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. J Prosthodont. 2018;1:35–41.
   Google Scholar
• Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F. Accuracy of intra-oral scans compared to conventional impression in vitro. Prim Dent J. 2019;8(3):34–39.
   Google Scholar
• Guth JF, Runkel C, Beuer F, et al. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21:1445–1455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: an in-vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2015;59(4):236–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F. Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression-a split-mouth randomised clinical study. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23:4043–4050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl BE, Dahl JE, Ronold HJ. Internal fit of three-unit fixed dental prostheses produced by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing and the lost-wax metal casting technique assessed using the triple-scan protocol. Eur J Oral Sci. 2018;126:66–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeltner M, Sailer I, Muhlemann S, et al. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(3):354–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakornwimon N, Leevailoj C. Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients' preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(3):386–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodiger M, Heinitz A, Burgers R, et al. Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21:579–587.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gjelvold B, Chrcanovic BR, Korduner EK, et al. Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial. J Prosthodont. 2016;25(4):282–287.
   Google Scholar
• Methani MM, Revilla-Leon M, Zandinejad A. The potential of additive manufacturing technologies and their processing parameters for the fabrication of all-ceramic crowns: a review. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020;32:182–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alharbi N, Wismeijer D, Osman RB. Additive manufacturing techniques in prosthodontics: where do we currently stand? A critical review. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(5):474–484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Javaid M, Haleem A. Current status and applications of additive manufacturing in dentistry: a literature-based review. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2019;9(3):179–185.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bae EJ, Jeong ID, Kim WC, et al. A comparative study of additive and subtractive manufacturing for dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(2):187–193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barazanchi A, Li KC, Al-Amleh B, et al. Additive technology: update on current materials and applications in dentistry. J Prosthodont. 2017;26:156–163.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dawood A, Marti Marti B, Sauret-Jackson V, et al. 3D printing in dentistry. Br Dent J. 2015;219:521–529.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osman RB, Alharbi N, Wismeijer D. Build angle: does it influence the accuracy of 3D-printed dental restorations using digital light-processing technology? Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30:182–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molin M, Karlsson S. The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1993;51:201–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, et al. Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84:419–424.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, et al. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989;62(4):405–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971;131:107–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segerstrom S, Wiking-Lima de Faria J, Braian M, et al. A validation study of the impression replica technique. J Prosthodont. 2019;28:609–616.
   Google Scholar
• Schonberger J, Erdelt KJ, Baumer D, et al. Evaluation of two protocols to measure the accuracy of fixed dental prostheses: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont. 2019;28:599–603.
   Google Scholar
• Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, et al. Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns – validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil. 2008;35:116–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan DC, Wilson AH, Jr.,Barbe P, et al. Effect of preparation convergence on retention and seating discrepancy of complete veneer crowns. J. Oral Rehabil. 2005;32:58–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alharbi N, Alharbi S, Cuijpers V, et al. Three-dimensional evaluation of marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed interim restorations fabricated on different finish line designs. J Prosthodont Res. 2018;62:218–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmood DJH, Braian M, Larsson C, et al. Production tolerance of conventional and digital workflow in the manufacturing of glass ceramic crowns. Dent Mater. 2019;35:486–494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar