3 /34 /1389 /
! " # $%& *
( ) * !+, -**
.!) !/ -***
! +0 + /. -****
* !"
**
!" #
***
!" # $$% &'
**** (
# 1 2 3 :
17 / 1 / 89 : 2 3 :
3 / 5 / 89
=! >?
! :
! .
# $ % # &
' ( ) * ' + , -
. / #
0 12 & 3 ) 4 5
6 7
0 - 1 8
. 9
9# ' 5 5
:# #
Sprint
# . ; < =
-. > 1=) ,
?$ 9 :# # ( @% A 5
$ B $ )8 # ) =
.
:
C 8 1=) , D
E 60 & . ' $ < H 1
6 ,/ #
5 # < J # 1 K
+ 10 ) - M & # 1N 1
1 # 90 . 8 1N # - 0 .# % # 1 .
.# % ' 30
$ B :# 1 9
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
# # # # * +, -. :
0 1 #
23! : 15 ) 8829501 ) 0511 09153178621
E-mail: Sadafi.Mehdi@yahoo.com
Comparison of Internal Marginal Gap in Two Methods of Inceram Coping Fabrication
AzamSadat Madani*, MohammadReza Sabooni**, Mehdi Sadafi***#, Fahimeh Arjomandi**** * Associate Professor of Prosthodontics, Dental Research Center of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad,
Iran.
** Associate Professor, Dept of Prosthodontics, Dental School, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. *** Postgraduate Student, Dept of Prosthodontics, Dental School, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
**** Dentist
Received: 6 April 2010; Accepted: 25 July 2010
Introduction: Dental porcelains have an important role in fabrication of the most beautiful restorations. Biocompatibility and translucency in ceramics make them one of the most agreeable restorative materials. Introduction of inceram system has been considered as a great change in the field of restoration. Inceram is made by two ways including Sprint technique and Conventional Method. The purpose of this study was comparing internal marginal gap in Sprint and conventional Alumina methods for making Inceram copings.
Materials & Methods: In this in vitro study, 60-die resin-base with 6-millimeter length and 5-millimeter diameter in the cervical area were fabricated. They were prepared with a 10-degree, convergence angle and 1-millimeter shoulder width with 90-degree shoulder angle. The specimens were then divided into two groups. Next, in one 30-item group, the cores were prepared via Sprint method and in the other group, via conventional method (Alumina). After the cores were set, they were cemented by Panavia and for measuring the rate of internal gap, the specimens were examined via optical microscope
Olympus BH60 with 1-micron precision. The data were compared statistically by students t-tests (α=0.05).
Results: Examining the mean internal gap between two groups, it was revealed that the mean internal gap in the Sprint group (181.6 microns) was greater than Alumina group (114.2 microns) and the difference was significant (P=0.015). Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, marginal adaptation in Sprint method was less than conventional method of core fabricating (Alumina).
Key words:Coping, inceram, internal marginal gap. #
# #
# # 3 9 3 # 9 3 Q # - 1 $ )8 ) = :# 1 C .# % *
1 @% 3 6 % . N
/ 1 R J # J 3# J
Olympus BH60
3 8 . - #8 S N T &UH # $ V % /
t-student
- 1 ) 05 / 0
α α α α=
(
@. :
@% Z $ B .# % @% 3 6 19 3 .# % #
6 / 181 3# J $ )8 # 2
/ 114 3# J #
T# ; .# % # $=
- N# )
015 / 0
P=
.(
A @ :
1 9 :# 9 $ B :# ( ^ , 1=) , _
) = T $ )8
.
= ! :
?$ 9 * 5 * @% (
.
/ 1389 34
/ 3 : 6 231 .
!
!" # $ % & &' (
Sudoun
) * 1986 ( . ) 1 ( (23" *2 4
( % 5 6 7
2 (23" *
892(
(
:
; < ! =( *2 *2 $ 6 2
.
( > ?
?@ '( A2> * :
B C 2> ? D3 * E ' 4 F 2: $ (4 &( 4 * =B G ' 4 3 $ H >
I * 4
* F .
) 2 (
> 4* H
(23"*2 2 >
. K4* > L9 6M N(
* 294 *2 M 9
!" E
. K4* * NO 5*2 E * *2 ?
32 ;( * LP 2 " Q ? (
* * °c 1120
% ( 40 & T > ?
( 2 ! ( 4
NO K4* * H P = *2U
( . ) 2 ( *
3 F K4* *
(23" *2 > 32 ;( ! ( ?
4 2> I2< > V
5*2 (
2 2> T ! : .
B < &B2( *2W (
% ( I2< *4 # X* ( Y U (
. ) 3 (
W ( E * [ NO K4* * % \ 4 ] H 4* * * \
( 2
^ U( X* ( F * _ U $ %*2` .
3 _ T X* ( F * H 4*
a 4
* 294 ! b I 5* 2 .
* ! =
( B * * T _ T 4 =
M` B ! @ '( 5
50 d N= * !4 (
. ) 4 ( 2 5 ! b I T4
e f U( ! ( N# H
50 !4 ( .
H 4* ) X* ( g: hi > 5 6
GN-I ) j O2 > K4*
b2M M 4 (23"
CAD/CAM (
@ 2 Kokubo
B : * T * *2( ! * 4 .
* g: @ 2 (
;3 U( 8 / 66 ( 2 !4 5 * (" hi > 4 ;(
*
! ( T
? = 5 =( 32( 4 32( O 5
. ) 5 (
;3 U( * Sulaimen
3 _ U
) 161 !4 ( ( H 4* * * (
_ &' 4
Procera 4 IPS Empress $ 8
4 F & U 83
4 63 ! = * !4 ( .
) 6 (
Shearer 4 6 K > ! = ! * 4
X* ( _ U M O > GF ( 4 * 32 * lm .
3 /34 /1389 /
;3 U( * Edward
X* ( _ U 5 ! =
= *2 * 2 o O (
5 E ( 4
* (" %4 6 MB 5 2 ;(
*
. ) 8 ( %4 6 92 ) $ ( 4 M 4 p:
L9 5 NO ! ( 4 j
4 * 5*2 q2 4
K4* ? *2 > *
;3 U( # F ? &(
4* K4* * X* ( M> _ U 4 *2 > )2 ;(
%*2` K4*
( : .
; : M> ( P= ( " ;3 U( * 60
)2< * 6
M ( ( UT 4 5 M ( ( F *
A* & 4 4 ) 4 10
9* * 32 r $ 4 1
M ( ( 5 (" .
2' 5 5 (" *
83 T M 4 :
83 T 5 ( @ 2 :
2 M
Y2B ; 5 > ] E 4* 2
.
2 ! E =( X232B*2( * 5 5 ("
> K 2 32( O 5 *2 .
E ) ( ) 2M sU 4*
Notch ; 1
× 1 M ( ( L H>
j O2 2 :2M9 5 >
U& 4 u B*
sU * vP( ) L9 *
) 2w 1 .( 2 B w %*2w
2 54 : 30
& .
* E 54 : ? K4* *2 Sprint
> .
*
54 : 2 M 2( M 4
4 @ 2
4 C2wN( p: (VITA In-ceram
Sprint update Kit) N *
) ml 6 / 4 U&( A" +
gr 20
C2wN( p: (
uO 1 $ ? 4 9 83 T
I E inceram insulation
Vita N H B L9
F * ! 9 4 4*
!" 5 . Slip >* @ 2 5 `2 K4* 92 5
5 3 ( 4* 4 5 (" .
3 X* ( W
_ U Slip * 4* .
4 j O2 5*2 *
Burn out ( *
130
160 % ( P 9* 20
30 ( T & T .
j O2 u ( *
1120 ? P 9* *2 *
5
% ( 4 32 ;( 40
2 4 !4 4 & T Sinter
4 Glass infiltration 5 >* *2 _ <
%* F * 1110
4 9* 40 & T 2 4 5
]
. uO ? NO GF (
j O2 4*
5 = .
j O2 X* ( * d &
v: * ;3 U( 2 5 *2> b .
54 : * P
*2 K4* > )2 ;( .
L 4 5 (" GF ( M Slip
)4 K4* =(
34 ? 2 K4* C2wN( p: M 4
B : %*2` (VITA Zahnfabric, Bad Sackingen,
Germany) % M $ 4
>* *2 _ < 34 j
4 F 4 ] 10
( ] )2< $ L * 4
5*2 ( 1120
* 9* u 4
Glass
infiltration 5
/ 2 ( * 4 $ 1110
9* _ <
] 2 4 !4 4 >* *2 .
j O2 4* 54 : 4
5 = 4
4 O ! F
(Panavia F2.0 Kuraray Medical INC.
Okayama, Japan) !
. 4 ! ! [T2(
1000 j O2 4* ( : 5 * T
. 8
@ 2 4 5 * T MO 5 ! *2 4* ) ;( * =B E 34* o O 5 P 1000
* 4 :
: . * 4 5 ( 2 M * G> *
3 2P 32 L9 M 4
5 P Servocut-M300
) > Metcom
*2= (
3 ( N# 7
/ 0 M ( ( *2> K M` B 4
Ti G'( * &B M> ^2U K ) : 5* 2
U& 4 * j O2 ^2U @ 4 *
) 2P 3 4 )
@ 2 *2 y2 4 ( Olympus BH60
T 1
!4 ( 5
:
) w 4 2 4 3 (.
2w 1 :
*
notch
) *
2w 2 :
E &B g: E O2 4 ( j O2
54 : *
A
= j O2
B
= !
C
=
2w 3 :
E &B g: E O2 4 ( j O2
54 : *
32 ;( (23"
A
= j O2
B
= !
C
=
5 | `2 P ( 5 6
4 * ;( h '
B : %*2` .
h4 :2 M !2( " u 7
h2
4 5 3 ( * !2( "
t-student
54 : 4 &( 5 6
? * ;( sU
!2( " 05
/ 0 α= B : W * .
@.
) 2P 3 4 ) sU 4 * M> g: @ 2 ( ! = a 4 B : * T &( *2( 54 : 4
%4 6 54 : 4 * M> g: @ 2 ( ;(
* .
*2< 2 (23" 54 : = 54 : *
) )4 9 1 .(
)4 9 1 :
54 : 4 * &B g: @ 2 ( * ;( h ' 4 P ( ;3 U( *2(
* ;( h ' P ( ;
8 / 101
7 / 109
2 / 114
6 / 181
30 $
30 $
.Alumina .Sprint
5 / 2
t=
015 / 0
P-value=
B,(
! (* &B2( * L( G( 2$ ? l 4 O
5 *2> K ! H 4* X* ( _ U .
294
4 ! ! GF ] ( X* ( F * M` B biO [ ] }B V 4 5 ! : 2O B D3 A L 3 4 (
L *
2> 5 * = *2 * .
[ = *2 *
?E (
. > (23" u 9 *2 * (
4 2
2> 4 M O !" 4* .
3 /34 /1389 /
(4 &( * 5 5 ! = PFM1
* 294 %4 6 4 .
) 9 ( * *2 >
C > @ ' (
* 2 4 )2 ;( 5*2
%* F 9* 1120
% ( P 9* 40
& T
: ] 2 4 5 )
K4* .(
K4* *
5*2 * *2 > ? P I2< ! ( 4 C2wN(
10 $ 2 4 !4 4 2 2>
. ) F G 3
4 [ NO K4* * % \ ]
G \
* e `2w> &( B : w X* ( F
5 X* ( F * K4* 4 M> g: :
: %*2` .
|M N( % ;3 U( _ < )2 T G T X* ( g:
60 120 5 K* : !4 ( .
) 14 7 10 4 6 (
:* g: &&'( > 50
! 2 $ * !4 (
X* ( (Open margin)
: W * B . ) 9 ( E
8 ( E (
X* ( g: ! 2 30
* !4 (
*4" . ) 4 ( * M> g: @ 2 ( # F ;3 U( *
(23" ) 2 / 114 ( K4* * 4 )
6 / 181 ( 2
]( g: K vO 120
!4 ( ) E( 3 ( : g M>
]( F * (23" > )2 ;( K4* (
34 ?
F V 200 2 &M ]( ! 2 $ !4 ( )
11 4 10 4 1 (
4 K4* : W
g 4 '( * M> 5
* T ](
* . _ &' # F ~;3 U( *2( * L =(
= B . *
! * 4 *I _ &' )
15 ( GF ( % lm 4*
H 4* X* ( _ U 4* NO ) (
5 ! = j (*2B4 3 K4* 5 > E ( H B •$ M O NO GF ( 3 M` B
5 . )2 T G T F * % \ 34 .
1. Porcelain Fused Metal (PFM)
H 4* = * ?
\ ( ! ( M 9 6M N(
! ! P 2P 4 5 (" GF ( ?K A* & !" % *€ 5 4 l2(
. ) 16 ( ;3 U( * # F
2 4 4 NO ! ( Q2 ( E * hi > = * K4* * X* ( _ U G =(
( 92 2 .
W ( 5 2 NO ! ( *
( F * ?*2 ' H G 3 2
|M N( GF ( * 4 4* NO
G \ ! (
X* ( 2 8 * .
F * 2 4 294 B <
K4* * NO Sprint
( $ 4 : L9 * 2
G $ X* ( M> _ U .
* %4 6 K4*
Glass infiltration 892(
2> *2 L '
( 892( 2 *2 ' * %4 6
K4* *
)2 ;( K4* &( * 2
. *
%4 6 W ;3 U( * 2 4 4 NO ! (
( \ ( L * (
*2( * % & &'
E ( * \ ( lm .
( * !2
%I F o 4 292( & &' ( . ;3 U( * Pera
D F 8 ( K > ?
_ U * 32 4 6 ?
4 50
€ 9*
5 ) 17 ( 4 Gevelis 4* K > lm
m X* ( _ U *
. ) 18 ( K > # F ;3 U( *
2 * 32
90 2 9* 4 5 (
2
g: ! ( M>
5 (" q2 Q2 ( F
N A I H B .
o 3 W
• M
N I H B * 32 K4*
E (
M 9 .
) 9 (
4 * 5 > *2 ' 5 L = O : * T * *2( K4* .
W (
K4* * 2 4 @ 4 %4 6 ( %* F
*2 ' * v: lm
.
A @
4 '( 92 _ U ;3 U(
M> *
%*2` *2 > K4* K4* 32 ;( ) (23" ( 2 . L H 4* > *
: K4*
[ ?
2= 5 6 .
!C >D3
4 ;( '(
= 4‚O 5 P=
O 2M$
L=( 5 2 G & * & &' ^ <
L 4 & = ( 2 .
E(
1. Rateitschak KH, Wolf HF. Color Atlas of Dental Medicine, Aesthetic Dentistry. 1st ed. Stuttgart: Thiem; 2000. P. 1, 147, 163.
2. Dorn HJ. In-ceram and In-ceram spinell all ceramic prostheses in combination with metal ceramics and vita omega. Quintessence Dent Tech 1997; 20: 115-24.
3. Sorensen JA. A standardized method for determination of crown marginal fidelity. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64(1): 18-24.
4. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Co; 2006. P. 643, 890.
5. Kokubo Y, Nagayama Y, Tsumita M, Ohkubo C, Fukushima S, Vult von steyern P. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of In-Ceram crowns fabricated using the GN-I system. J Oral Rehabil 2005; 32(10): 753-8. 6. Sulaimen F, Chai J, Jameson LM, Wozniak WT. A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress
and Procera crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1997; 10(5): 478-84.
7. Shearer B, Gough MB, Setchell DJ. Influence of marginal configuration and porcelain addition on the fit of In-Ceram crowns. Biomaterials 1996; 17(19): 1891-5.
8. Goldin EB, Boyd NW 3rd, Goldstein GR, Hittelman EL, Thompson VP. Marginal fit of leucite-glass pressable ceramic restorations and ceramic-pressed-to-metal restoration. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93(2): 143-7.
9. Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jocobi R, Brackett SE, Shillinburg HT. Fundamentals of Fixed Prosthodontics. 3rd ed. Chicago: Quintessence Co; 1997. P.130, 392-3, 463.
10. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an invivo technique. Br Dent J 1971; 131(3): 107-11.
11. Holms JR, Sulik WD, Holland GA, Bayne SC. Marginal fit of castable ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67(5): 594-9.
12. Boyle JJJr, Naylor WP, Blackman RB. Marginal accuracy of metal ceramic restorations with porcelain facial margins. J Prosthet Dent 1993; 69(1): 19-27.
13. Nakamura T, Tanaka H, Kinuta S, Akao T, Okamoto K, Wakabayashi K, et al. In vitro study on marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM all-ceramic crowns. Dent Mater J 2005; 24(3): 456-9.
14. Akbar JH, Petrie CS, Walker MP, Williams K, Erick JD. Marginal adaptation of cevec3 CAD/CAM composite crowns using two different finish line preparation designs. J Prosthodont 2006; 15(3): 155-63.
15. Salari M, Jalalian E, Asgarian S. The influence of porcelain firing cycle on marginal fitness of electroformed metal-ceramic crowns. Dental Journal Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences 2010; 27(4): 165-72. (Persian)
16. Schwartz IS. A review of methods and techniques to improve the fit of cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1986; 56(3): 279-83.
17. Pera P, Gilodi S, Bassi F, Carossa S. In vitro marginal adaptation of alumina porcelain ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1994; 72(6): 585-90.
