Accuracy of single-unit ceramic crown fabrication after digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Jimmy Manisha, Gunjan Srivastava, Sitansu Sekhar Das, Naghma Tabarak, Gopal Krishna Choudhury
{"title":"Accuracy of single-unit ceramic crown fabrication after digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jimmy Manisha, Gunjan Srivastava, Sitansu Sekhar Das, Naghma Tabarak, Gopal Krishna Choudhury","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_534_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the present era when interest in digital dentistry is increasing, the published literature is still confusing about whether digital impression provides similar accuracy as provided by a conventional impression for the fabrication of a single-unit ceramic crown. The aim of the study was to systematically review the in vivo studies comparing marginal, axial, and occlusal fit of single-unit ceramic crowns fabricated after digital impressions with the ones fabricated after conventional impressions. The PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane online databases were searched for studies comparing the digital impression technique with the conventional technique for single-unit ceramic crowns. Data extraction was done for the year of publication, type of study, country, number of patients, impression system (intraoral scanner [IOS] or conventional impression), marginal fit, axial fit, and occlusal fit. Ten studies were included for meta-analysis regarding the discrepancy in marginal fit, axial fit, and occlusal fit. The digital impression proved to be better than the conventional impression. The mean difference for marginal fit was 6.54 μm (heterogeneity P < 0.00001, I<sup>2</sup> = 93%), for axial fit 24.69 μm (heterogeneity P = 0.34, I<sup>2</sup> = 11%), and for occlusal fit 6.99 μm (heterogeneity P = 0.03, I<sup>2</sup> = 59%). The results of meta-analyses suggest that there is no significant difference between the impression systems (marginally favoring digital impression). The digital impression technique provided better marginal and internal fit of single-unit ceramic crowns than the conventional impression technique. The digital workflow using IOS provided a clinically acceptable marginal fit for single-unit crowns.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"23 2","pages":"105-111"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10262093/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_534_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the present era when interest in digital dentistry is increasing, the published literature is still confusing about whether digital impression provides similar accuracy as provided by a conventional impression for the fabrication of a single-unit ceramic crown. The aim of the study was to systematically review the in vivo studies comparing marginal, axial, and occlusal fit of single-unit ceramic crowns fabricated after digital impressions with the ones fabricated after conventional impressions. The PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane online databases were searched for studies comparing the digital impression technique with the conventional technique for single-unit ceramic crowns. Data extraction was done for the year of publication, type of study, country, number of patients, impression system (intraoral scanner [IOS] or conventional impression), marginal fit, axial fit, and occlusal fit. Ten studies were included for meta-analysis regarding the discrepancy in marginal fit, axial fit, and occlusal fit. The digital impression proved to be better than the conventional impression. The mean difference for marginal fit was 6.54 μm (heterogeneity P < 0.00001, I2 = 93%), for axial fit 24.69 μm (heterogeneity P = 0.34, I2 = 11%), and for occlusal fit 6.99 μm (heterogeneity P = 0.03, I2 = 59%). The results of meta-analyses suggest that there is no significant difference between the impression systems (marginally favoring digital impression). The digital impression technique provided better marginal and internal fit of single-unit ceramic crowns than the conventional impression technique. The digital workflow using IOS provided a clinically acceptable marginal fit for single-unit crowns.

数码印模与传统印模后单冠陶瓷制作的准确性:系统回顾与荟萃分析。
当今时代,人们对数字化牙科技术的兴趣与日俱增,但对于数字化印模在制作单体陶瓷冠时是否能提供与传统印模相似的精确度,已发表的文献仍很混乱。本研究的目的是系统性地回顾活体研究,比较数码印模与传统印模制作的单体陶瓷冠的边缘、轴向和咬合密合度。本研究在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Cochrane 在线数据库中搜索了比较数码印模技术和传统技术制作单冠陶瓷冠的研究。数据提取包括发表年份、研究类型、国家、患者人数、印模系统(口内扫描仪 [IOS] 或传统印模)、边缘密合度、轴向密合度和咬合密合度。共纳入了十项研究,就边缘密合度、轴向密合度和咬合密合度的差异进行了荟萃分析。事实证明,数字印模比传统印模更好。边缘密合度的平均差异为 6.54 μm(异质性 P < 0.00001,I2 = 93%),轴向密合度的平均差异为 24.69 μm(异质性 P = 0.34,I2 = 11%),咬合密合度的平均差异为 6.99 μm(异质性 P = 0.03,I2 = 59%)。荟萃分析结果表明,不同印模系统之间没有显著差异(数字印模略胜一筹)。与传统印模技术相比,数字印模技术能提供更好的单体陶瓷冠边缘和内部密合度。使用 IOS 的数字化工作流程为单体牙冠提供了临床上可接受的边缘密合度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信