journal article·2024-05

Evaluation of the trueness and precision of ceramic laminate veneers fabricated with four computer-aided manufacturing methods

Anh Viet Nguyen, Ngoc Truong Nhu Vo, Tra Thu Nguyen, Son Minh Tong

Publisher page

Abstract

The accuracy of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) methods plays an important role in the clinical success of ceramic veneers. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of different CAD/CAM methods, including subtractive, hybrid, and additive manufacturing, on the trueness and precision of ceramic veneers. A typodont central incisor was prepared for a laminate veneer, followed by the design of a veneer with CAD software. Ceramic veneers were fabricated with four different CAD/CAM methods, including milled lithium disilicate, pressed lithium disilicate with three-dimensional (3D) printed wax patterns, milled zirconia, and 3D-printed zirconia. All veneers were scanned and imported to 3D inspection software for trueness and precision evaluation. Laminate veneers fabricated with all investigated methods exhibited clinically acceptable trueness and precision. Pressed lithium disilicate veneers from 3D-printed wax patterns and 3D-printed zirconia veneers showed lower precision of the fitting surfaces compared to their milled counterparts.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Conservation Techniques and Studies

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Dentistry, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam

Faculty of Dentistry, Phenikaa University, Hanoi, Vietnam

References (36)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.11607/prd.574210.11607/prd.5742 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.dental.2019.04.00810.1016/j.dental.2019.04.008 ↗
3. Hein S · Quintessence Dent Technol · 2011 · 34 · 25
4. 10.1111/jopr.1203210.1111/jopr.12032 ↗
5. 10.1080/17436753.2018.147680710.1080/17436753.2018.1476807 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.dental.2019.02.02710.1016/j.dental.2019.02.027 ↗
7. Leyva Del Rio D · J Adhes Dent · 2021 · 23 · 549
8. 10.1080/17436753.2018.151133710.1080/17436753.2018.1511337 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.02910.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.029 ↗
10. 10.1111/jerd.1267510.1111/jerd.12675 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.10418110.1016/j.jdent.2022.104181 ↗
12. 10.1002/cre2.65810.1002/cre2.658 ↗
13. 10.1177/002203451877128710.1177/0022034518771287 ↗
14. 10.4047/jap.2017.9.2.7710.4047/jap.2017.9.2.77 ↗
15. 10.1080/01694243.2023.229338210.1080/01694243.2023.2293382 ↗
16. 10.1111/jopr.1355310.1111/jopr.13553 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.09.01810.1016/j.prosdent.2019.09.018 ↗
18. 10.1080/26415275.2021.193857610.1080/26415275.2021.1938576 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.04.01210.1016/j.prosdent.2018.04.012 ↗
20. 10.3390/dj1011021510.3390/dj10110215 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.10379210.1016/j.jdent.2021.103792 ↗
22. 10.4047/jap.2020.12.4.22510.4047/jap.2020.12.4.225 ↗
23. 10.1055/s-0043-176447810.1055/s-0043-1764478 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.jpor.2019.06.00410.1016/j.jpor.2019.06.004 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.07.00710.1016/j.prosdent.2020.07.007 ↗
26. 10.3390/jcm806078510.3390/jcm8060785 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.08.00310.1016/j.prosdent.2013.08.003 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.adaj.2017.08.03110.1016/j.adaj.2017.08.031 ↗
29. Falih MY · Eur J Dent · 2022 · 17 · 1056
30. 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.10441510.1016/j.jdent.2023.104415 ↗
31. 10.1080/17436753.2022.206998810.1080/17436753.2022.2069988 ↗
32. 10.4012/dmj.2021-23610.4012/dmj.2021-236 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.00610.1016/j.dental.2011.09.006 ↗
34. Thakare A · Mater Today Proc · 2022 · 57
35. 10.1007/s00784-016-1916-y10.1007/s00784-016-1916-y ↗
36. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2023.09.01010.1016/j.ajodo.2023.09.010 ↗