Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

CAD/CAM milled removable complete dentures: an in vitro evaluation of trueness

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the trueness of one type of CAD/CAM milled complete removable dental prostheses (CRDPs) with injection-molding and conventionally manufactured CRDPs.

Materials and methods

Thirty-three CRDPs were fabricated by three different manufacturing techniques (group CAD/CAM (AvaDent™): n = 11; group injection molding (Ivocap™): n = 11; group flask-pack-press: n = 11) using a single master reference model and incubated in artificial saliva for 21 days. The trueness of the entire intaglio surface along with five specific regions of interest (vestibular-flange, palate, tuberosities, alveolar crest, and post-dam areas) was compared. Non-parametric tests were used with a level of significance set at p < 0.05.

Results

At baseline, there was no difference in the trueness of the total intaglio surfaces between the groups. After incubation, only the conventional CRDPs showed a significant improvement in trueness of the entire intaglio surface (p = 0.0044), but improved trueness was confirmed for all three techniques in most individual regions of interest. The 80–20 % /2 median quantile of the CAD/CAM group demonstrated the highest variability of individual readings, probably due to the size of the milling instrument. However, for all three techniques, 80 % of all deviations of the complete intaglio surface after incubation in saliva were below 0.1 mm.

Conclusions

In this in vitro study, the trueness of the intaglio surface of all three investigated techniques seems to remain within a clinically acceptable range. Additional research is warranted on material-related aspects, cost-effectiveness, clinical performance, patient-centered outcomes, as well as other CAD/CAM techniques for CRDP fabrication.

Clinical relevance

The intaglio surface trueness is an essential aspect in the clinical performance of CRDPs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jacob RF (1998) The traditional therapeutic paradigm: complete denture therapy. J Prosthet Dent 79:6–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Murray MD, Darvell BW (1993) The evolution of the complete denture base. Theories of complete denture retention--a review. Part 1. Aust Dent J 38:216–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Busch M, Kordass B (2006) Concept and development of a computerized positioning of prosthetic teeth for complete dentures. Int J Comput Dent 9:113–120

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Goodacre CJ, Garbacea A, Naylor WP, Daher T, Marchack CB, Lowry J (2012) CAD/CAM fabricated complete dentures: concepts and clinical methods of obtaining required morphological data. J Prosthet Dent 107:34–46. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60015-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kanazawa M, Inokoshi M, Minakuchi S, Ohbayashi N (2011) Trial of a CAD/CAM system for fabricating complete dentures. Dent Mater J 30:93–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kawahata N, Ono H, Nishi Y, Hamano T, Nagaoka E (1997) Trial of duplication procedure for complete dentures by CAD/CAM. J Oral Rehabil 24:540–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Maeda Y, Minoura M, Tsutsumi S, Okada M, Nokubi T (1994) A CAD/CAM system for removable denture. Part I: fabrication of complete dentures. Int J Prosthodont 7:17–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Inokoshi M, Kanazawa M, Minakuchi S (2012) Evaluation of a complete denture trial method applying rapid prototyping. Dent Mater J 31:40–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sun Y, Lu P, Wang Y (2009) Study on CAD&RP for removable complete denture. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 93:266–272. doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2008.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang YD, Jiang JG, Liang T, Hu WP (2011) Kinematics modeling and experimentation of the multi-manipulator tooth-arrangement robot for full denture manufacturing. J Med Syst 35:1421–1429. doi:10.1007/s10916-009-9419-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Goodacre BJ, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ, Kattadiyil MT (2016) Comparison of denture base adaptation between CAD/CAM and conventional fabrication techniques. J Prosthet Dent. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.02.017

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kattadiyil MT, Goodacre CJ, Lozada JL, Garbacea A (2015) Digitally planned and fabricated mandibular fixed complete dentures. Part 2. Prosthodontic phase. Int J Prosthodont 28:119–123. doi:10.11607/ijp.4181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kattadiyil MT, Jekki R, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ (2015) Comparison of treatment outcomes in digital and conventional complete removable dental prosthesis fabrications in a predoctoral setting. J Prosthet Dent 114:818–825. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bidra AS, Taylor TD, Agar JR (2013) Computer-aided technology for fabricating complete dentures: systematic review of historical background, current status, and future perspectives. J Prosthet Dent 109:361–366. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60318-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Papaspyridakos P, Gallucci GO, Chen CJ, Hanssen S, Naert I, Vandenberghe B (2016) Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res 27:465–472. doi:10.1111/clr.12567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Srinivasan M, Schimmel M, Badoud I, Ammann P, Herrmann FR, Muller F (2015) Influence of implant angulation and cyclic dislodging on the retentive force of two different overdenture attachments - an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. doi:10.1111/clr.12643

    Google Scholar 

  17. Srinivasan M, Schimmel M, Kobayashi M, Badoud I, Ammann P, Herrmann FR, Muller F (2015) Influence of different lubricants on the retentive force of LOCATOR attachments - an in vitro pilot study. Clin Oral Implants Res. doi:10.1111/clr.12680

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mehl A, Koch R, Zaruba M, Ender A (2013) 3D monitoring and quality control using intraoral optical camera systems. Int J Comput Dent 16:23–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Flugge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC (2013) Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 144:471–478. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Califf RM, Pryor DB, Rosati RA (1984) Regression modelling strategies for improved prognostic prediction. Stat Med 3:143–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG (2009) Statistical power analyses using G*power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41:1149–1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gal JY, Fovet Y, Adib-Yadzi M (2001) About a synthetic saliva for in vitro studies. Talanta 53:1103–1115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bayer S, Keilig L, Kraus D, Gruner M, Stark H, Mues S, Enkling N (2011) Influence of the lubricant and the alloy on the wear behaviour of attachments. Gerodontology 28:221–226. doi:10.1111/j.1741-2358.2009.00352.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Besimo CE, Guarneri A (2003) In vitro retention force changes of prefabricated attachments for overdentures. J Oral Rehabil 30:671–678

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Botega DM, Mesquita MF, Henriques GE, Vaz LG (2004) Retention force and fatigue strength of overdenture attachment systems. J Oral Rehabil 31:884–889. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01308.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Goiato MC, Dos Santos DM, Andreotti AM, Nobrega AS, Moreno A, Haddad MF, Pesqueira AA (2014) Effect of beverages and mouthwashes on the hardness of polymers used in intraoral prostheses. Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists 23:559–564. doi:10.1111/jopr.12151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Goiato MC, Dos Santos DM, Baptista GT, Moreno A, Andreotti AM, Dekon SF (2013) Effect of thermal cycling and disinfection on microhardness of acrylic resin denture base. Journal of medical engineering & technology 37:203–207. doi:10.3109/03091902.2013.774444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Schaefer O, Decker M, Wittstock F, Kuepper H, Guentsch A (2014) Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro. J Dent 42:677–683. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.01.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ender A, Mehl A (2013) Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 109:121–128. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60028-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Firtell DN, Green AJ, Elahi JM (1981) Posterior peripheral seal distortion related to processing temperature. J Prosthet Dent 45:598–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sanders JL, Levin B, Reitz PV (1991) Comparison of the adaptation of acrylic resin cured by microwave energy and conventional water bath. Quintessence Int 22:181–186

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sykora O, Sutow EJ (1993) Posterior palatal seal adaptation: influence of processing technique, palate shape and immersion. J Oral Rehabil 20:19–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Woelfel JB, Paffenbarger GC, Sweeney WT (1960) Dimensional changes occurring in dentures during processing. J Am Dent Assoc 61:413–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wong DM, Cheng LY, Chow TW, Clark RK (1999) Effect of processing method on the dimensional accuracy and water sorption of acrylic resin dentures. J Prosthet Dent 81:300–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

MDT Roger Renevey is acknowledged for the manufacturing of the injection-molded dentures and dental technician Fabien Chevrolet for fabrication of the conventional CRDPs. Thanks are due to Global Dental Science, Tilburg, The Netherlands, for manufacturing the CAD/CAM dentures.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Division of Gerodontology and Removable Prosthodontics, University Clinics of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, 19 Rue Barthélemy-Menn, 1205, Geneva, Switzerland

      Murali Srinivasan, Yoann Cantin, Frauke Müller & Martin Schimmel

    2. Division of Computerized Restorative Dentistry, Clinic of Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, Centre for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

      Albert Mehl

    3. Department of Clinical Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

      Harald Gjengedal

    4. Department of Internal Medicine, Rehabilitation and Geriatrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, Thônex, Switzerland

      Frauke Müller

    5. Division of Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

      Martin Schimmel

    Authors
    1. Murali Srinivasan
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Yoann Cantin
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    3. Albert Mehl
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    4. Harald Gjengedal
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    5. Frauke Müller
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    6. Martin Schimmel
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Frauke Müller.

    Ethics declarations

    Conflict of interest

    Dr. Murali Srinivasan declares he has no conflict of interest related to this study. Yoann Cantin declares he has no conflict of interest related to this study. Prof. Albert Mehl declares he has no conflict of interest related to this study. Dr. Harald Gjengedal declares he has no conflict of interest related to this study. Prof. Frauke Müller declares she has no conflict of interest related to this study. Prof. Martin Schimmel declares he has no conflict of interest related to this study.

    Funding

    The funding for the manufacturing of the specimens used in this study was entirely funded by the division of gerodontology and removable prosthodontics, university clinics of dental medicine, university of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. The laboratory scanner used in this study was purchased with the funds from a grant (Project: 281–14) from the Swiss Dental Association (SSO–Schweizerische Zahnärzte-Gesellschaft).

    Ethical approval

    This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

    Informed consent

    For this in vitro study, a formal informed consent was not required.

    Additional information

    Murali Srinivasan and Yoann Cantin contributed equally as first authors.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Srinivasan, M., Cantin, Y., Mehl, A. et al. CAD/CAM milled removable complete dentures: an in vitro evaluation of trueness. Clin Oral Invest 21, 2007–2019 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1989-7

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1989-7

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation