The International journal of prosthodontics最新文献

{"title":"In Vitro Evaluation of Ambient Lighting Effects on Intraoral Scanner Accuracy for Maxillary and Mandibular Arches.","authors":"Selen Erkul, Beliz Kapiz, Yunus Emre Ozden, Zeynep Ozkurt Kayahan, Ender Kazazoglu","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9677","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The effect of ambient lighting on intraoral scanner accuracy has mostly been evaluated for single-arch scans, leaving limited evidence regarding its comparative influence on maxillary and mandibular arches. The purpose of this study was to compare intraoral scanner accuracy for maxillary and mandibular arches under varying ambient lighting conditions.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A maxillary and a mandibular typodont model was digitized using a laboratory scanner (3Shape E4) to obtain reference STL files. Two different intraoral scanners (iTero Element 5D and TRIOS 3) were evaluated under five different lighting conditions: zero light, daylight, room light, low intensity chair light and high intensity chair light. 10 digital scans per each group and a total of 200 scans were performed (n=10). The digital scans and the reference STL files were superimposed using Geomagic Design X software to analyze accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistically significant differences were found among scanners, arches, and ambient lighting conditions (p<0.001). The mandibular arch showed greater accuracy than the maxillary arch (p<0.001). Zero light yielded the lowest trueness values while room light provided the most accurate results (p<0.001). Scanner performance varied under different lighting conditions, with iTero Element 5D consistently outperforming TRIOS 3.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ambient lighting significantly affects intraoral scanner accuracy, with room light providing the most reliable results. Optimizing lighting conditions is crucial for improving digital impression accuracy in clinical and laboratory settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145992478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparative Evaluation of Bond Strength Between Flowable and Condensable Composites to Dentin Treated by Sandblasting and Different Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Experimental Study.","authors":"Viet Anh Nguyen, Thi Thu Huong Nguyen, Viet Huong Nguyen, Thi Trang Nguyen","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9640","DOIUrl":"10.11607/ijp.9640","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated the bond strength of flowable and packable composites to sandblasted dentin using different adhesive systems.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 160 extracted premolars were sectioned at the upper-middle third and allocated into 16 groups (n=10) based on composite type, surface treatment, and adhesive system. In sandblasted groups, dentin was air-abraded with 50 µm aluminum oxide for 10 s. Composite cylinders (3 mm × 3 mm; 7.065 mm²) were bonded using Single Bond 2, Palfique Bond, or Single Bond Universal. Shear bond strength (SBS, MPa) and failure modes were recorded, and bonding interfaces were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA with Tukey's HSD, Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni correction, and Weibull analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Flowable composites, sandblasting, and the two-step application of Single Bond Universal each significantly improved bond strength. A three-way interaction was observed (F=5.12, p=0.01). Groups 1, 8, and 13 showed the highest bond strengths (11.47 ± 6.44, 15.88 ± 5.39, and 12.90 ± 4.98 MPa; p<0.05), with Groups 8 and 13 demonstrating superior Weibull modulus (m) and characteristic strength (σ₀). SEM analysis revealed these groups exhibited the most intimate adhesive-dentin contact with minimal interfacial defects. Failure mode assessment showed predominantly cohesive and mixed failures in Groups 1, 8, and 13.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sandblasting, flowable composites, and two-step Single Bond Universal enhance dentin bond strength. The most effective combinations were sandblasted dentin with flowable composite and Single Bond Universal (one-step), and non-sandblasted dentin with packable composite and Single Bond Universal (two-step).</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145992510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Alignment Accuracy in Dental CAD Software for Morphologically Altered Digital Models.","authors":"Ra'fat I Farah, Bandar Alresheedi","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9623","DOIUrl":"10.11607/ijp.9623","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the trueness and precision of alignment protocols across three dental CAD platforms for spatially aligning virtually altered digital dental models to their original position.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A digital cast of the lower dentition served as the basis for generating a digital model, which was morphologically altered through base trimming, virtual extractions, crown modifications, orthodontic tooth movements, surface adjustments, and mesh density reduction. The altered model was then displaced and aligned to the original cast using five alignment protocols across three software platforms: BlueSky Plan (landmark-based), Exocad (landmark-based and landmark-based with best-fit optimization), and Blender for Dental (B4D) (landmark-based with generalized ICP and reference-based with localized ICP). Each protocol was repeated ten times. Alignment accuracy was quantified against the reference standard using root mean square (RMS) error, average and maximum absolute 3D deviation, and linear landmark deviation. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, coefficient of variation (CV%), and Welch's ANOVA with Games-Howell post hoc tests (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Alignment accuracy differed significantly between methods (P<.001). Exocad's landmark-based with best-fit optimization achieved 12 μm RMS error (CV: 1.17%). B4D's reference-based with localized ICP achieved 47 μm (CV: 14.82%). Landmark-based methods performed poorly: BlueSky 250 μm, Exocad 160 μm, and B4D with generalized ICP 152 μm, with high variability (CV: 20.1-25.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Alignment method selection critically affects accuracy when processing altered dental digital models. Landmark-based alignment combined with optimized best-fit algorithms and reference-based alignment with localized ICP achieved clinically acceptable accuracy, while landmark-based methods alone produced unacceptable errors unsuitable for precision digital workflows.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145992492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Surface Quality of Direct Composite Resin Restorations Fabricated Using Different Resin Injection Guides.","authors":"Zhicheng Yin, Qianrong Xiang, Chenyang Xie, Li Han, Haiyang Yu","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9542","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9542","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the impact of different resin injection guides (RIGs) on the surface roughness (Ra), microhardness (MH), and conversion degree (CD) of direct composite resin restorations.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Disc-shaped specimens (diameter: 4.5 mm, thickness: 2 mm) were fabricated using five molding methods (n = 16 per group): freehand filling (FH), transparent polyester strip (PS), transparent polyvinyl siloxane guide (PVS), flexible resin guide with rigid shell (FR), and rigid resin guide (RG). Surface topography was analyzed using a multi-functional tribometer, and Ra values were calculated. MH was measured with a microhardness tester. CD was determined via Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Data were analyzed with ANOVA and post hoc tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences in Ra were found (P < .05), in the order of PS < FH < PVS < FR < RG. The PS, FR, and RG groups showed no significant differences in MH or CD (P > .05), but these values were significantly greater than those in the FH and PVS groups (P < .05). The PVS group had higher MH and CD than the FH group (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of guides prevents formation of the oxygen inhibition layer, increasing MH and CD by up to 22% compared to the freehand technique. Although all guides increased Ra compared to the polyester strip, the PVS guide produced the smoothest surfaces among the RIGs, albeit with lower MH and CD than the 3D-printed guides (FR, RG).</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145992484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Effect of Digital Cement Space Thickness on the Marginal Discrepancy of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns: A CAD-CAM Study.","authors":"Ameer Biadsee, Alon Ram, Zeev Ormianer","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9595","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9595","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This in vitro study evaluated the influence of digital cement space thickness (80 μm, 100 μm, 120 μm) on the marginal discrepancy of monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated using CAD/CAM technology.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventy-five monolithic zirconia crowns were digitally designed and milled with cement space thicknesses of 80, 100, and 120 μm (n = 25 per group). Marginal discrepancies were assessed at eight predetermined points using scanning electron microscopy at ×100 magnification. The measurement points-mesial (M), mesiobuccal (MB), buccal (B), distobuccal (DB), distal (D), distolingual (DL), lingual (L), and mesiolingual (ML)-were precisely marked on each crown using a custom-made PMMA mold with pre-formed positioning holes to ensure consistent localization. Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean marginal discrepancy at the 80 μm cement space was 33.35 μm, at the 100 μm cement space 31.36 μm, and 28.37 μm at 120 μm cement space. No statistically significant difference was found between groups. However, significant localized differences were found at the D and ML points between the 80 μm and 120 μm cement space groups (P = .035). All measured discrepancies were within the commonly accepted range (<120 μm).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limits of this in vitro study, variations in cement space thickness between 80 μm and 120 μm did not significantly influence marginal discrepancy. Digital cement space settings within this range produced accurate and consistent fits.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145992426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Evaluating the Survival, the Failure and the Complication Rates of Metal-Ceramic, Veneered and Monolithic All-Ceramic Tooth-Supported Single Crowns.","authors":"B E Pjetursson, J Pitta, A Balet, G R Bjarnadottir, I Sailer, P Romandini","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9633","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9633","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate five-year survival rates of metal-ceramic, veneered all-ceramic, and monolithic all-ceramic tooth-supported single crowns (SCs) and assess biological and technical complications.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic search of Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL (2014-2024) identified clinical studies on tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (≥3 years mean follow-up). Manual screening and 30 studies from previous reviews were added. Sixty-four studies met inclusion, reporting on 3,509 metal-ceramic and 8,051 all-ceramic SCs. Robust Poisson regression models were used to estimate pooled five-year survival rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies investigated metal-ceramic crowns, 49 all-ceramic crowns, and three both. Five-year survival rates were: 98.5% for monolithic lithium-disilicate reinforced glass-ceramic, 97.3% for veneered densely-sintered zirconia, 97.1% for metal-ceramic, 96.8% for monolithic densely-sintered zirconia, 95.7% for veneered leucite/lithium-disilicate reinforced glass-ceramic, 94.5% for densely-sintered alumina, 94.3% for glass-infiltrated alumina, 90.4% for feldspathic/silica-based ceramic. Survival rates of feldspathic/silica-based ceramic (p<0.0001), glass-infiltrated alumina (p=0.019), densely sintered alumina (p=0.002), and veneered leucite/lithium-disilicate reinforced glass-ceramic (p=0.021) were significantly lower than monolithic lithium-disilicate SCs. Except for feldspathic/silica-based ceramic and metal-ceramic crowns, material/design types performed similarly in anterior and posterior regions. Monolithic lithium-disilicate and monolithic zirconia crowns showed significantly fewer ceramic fractures and chipping compared to veneered alternatives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lithium-disilicate and zirconia-based all-ceramic SCs achieve five-year survival rates comparable to metal-ceramic crowns. Monolithic designs reduce fracture and chipping risk, improving long-term clinical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-47"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145907211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Esthetic Outcomes of 'One Crown One Time' Concept Compared to Conventional Soft Tissue Conditioning in Single Implant- Supported Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.","authors":"Cristina Zarauz, Irena Sailer, Duygu Narin-Karasan, Maria Doukantzi, Vincent Fehmer, Panagiotis Ntovas","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9591","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9591","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the effect of one crown one time (1C1T) protocol, in comparison with soft tissue conditioning involving multiple abutment disconnections, on the esthetic outcomes of single implant-supported restorations in healed implant sites.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty-nine patients over the age of 25, each receiving a single implant in the anterior or premolar regions, participated in this study. Half of the submerged implants were restored immediately after uncovering using a final screw-retained zirconia crown, luted to a titanium base. The remaining submerged implants initially received a healing abutment, followed by soft tissue conditioning phase with provisional restorations prior the delivery of the definitive crowns. All patients were followed for 12 months. Esthetic outcomes were assessed using Pink Esthetic Score (PES), analysis of peri-implant soft tissue volumetric alterations, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CG and 1C1T group exhibited mean PES of 8.9±2.6 and 10.5±1.6, respectively, at baseline (p >0.05) and of 10.8±2.2 and 11.1±1.2 at 1-year follow-up (p>0.05). Regarding volumetric soft tissue alterations, the CG presented a higher root mean square (RMS) discrepancy (median:336) compared to the 1C1T group (median:192 µm) (P<0.05). The CG exhibited a median linear gain of 329μm, while the test group showed a slight median reduction on -19μm. PROMs remained consistently high in both groups over time, with no statistically significant differences in median values at baseline (p>0.05), as well as in 12-months follow-up (P>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When appropriate surgical and prosthetic protocols are followed, omission of the provisional phase does not compromise the short-term esthetic outcomes of single implant restorations, rendering the one-crown one-time concept a viable treatment alternative.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145907275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effect of Total Occlusal Convergence Angle and Rounded Preparations on the Marginal and Internal Fit of Incisor Monolithic Zirconia Crowns.","authors":"Zeynep Özkurt-Kayahan, Markus B Blatz, Yunus Emre Özden, Akanay Çopuroğlu, Esra Silahtar, Ender Kazazoğlu","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9410","DOIUrl":"10.11607/ijp.9410","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the marginal and internal fit of anterior monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated over preparations with different TOC angles with and without a rounded incisal design.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Crown preparations of fourteen maxillary central incisors were digitally designed and fabricated using photosensitive resin. The axial wall inclinations were -8°, -4°, 0°, 8°, 12°, 16°, 22° with and without rounded incisal corners and a 1-mm-wide chamfer-type finish line. Monolithic zirconia crowns (n=10) were milled and assessed for fit using the dual-scan technique using an intraoral scanner. The STL files were analyzed in Geomagic Control X, measuring fit at 100, 150, and 175 points on the incisal, axial and marginal areas, respectively. Data normality was tested (Shapiro-Wilk), and TOC angle groups were compared using One-way ANOVA, Levene's test, Tukey HSD, and Independent Samples T-tests (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>TOC angle groups showed statistically significantly differences (p<0.001). The 22° preparation had the lowest marginal discrepancies (36±5 μm rounded, 61±5 μm non-rounded), while -8° had the highest (117±9 μm rounded, 147±30 μm non-rounded). Axial discrepancies were lowest at 22° (77±14 μm) and highest at -8° (208±52 μm) in non-rounded samples (p<0.001). The smallest incisal discrepancy was found in 22° (95 ± 13 μm); while the largest (163 ± 31μm) was at -4° in the non-rounded groups (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TOC angle and rounded preparations have a significant impact on the fit of CAD/CAM milled monolithic zirconia crowns. Rounded incisal corners and preparations with higher TOC angles increased marginal and internal adaptation of the crowns.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145907153","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Full Title of Manuscript: Impact of the Type of Surface Treatment of the Titanium Implant Framework and Heat-Cured Acrylic Resin Thickness on the Esthetic Outcomes of Hybrid Implant-Supported Prostheses.","authors":"Nithirat Charoennetr, Mali Palanuwech","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9567","DOIUrl":"10.11607/ijp.9567","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the effect of titanium surface treatment and heat-cured acrylic resin (AR) thickness on color differences (ΔE00) in AR.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty AR specimens were divided into three groups: 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 mm (n = 10 each). Each AR thickness group underwent testing over six titanium surface treatments (n = 10): untreated titanium (T), gleaming titanium (PT), 50 V anodization (G), polished gold-anodized (PG), 70 V anodization (P), and polished pink-anodized titanium (PP). All specimens from the 18 experimental groups were examined using a spectrophotometer and compared with the control group (10.0 mm AR, n = 5) to establish the color difference (ΔE00). ΔE00 < 4.08 was considered 50% clinically acceptable (50%AT), whereas ΔE00 < 1.72 denoted 50% clinically perceptibility (50%PT). The data collected were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance and post-hoc tests (P =.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AR thickness and type of titanium surface treatment significantly affected the observed ΔE00 (P <.05). When using a 1.0-mm AR over P- and PP-treated titanium, the mean ΔE00 was below 50%AT. When using a 2.0-mm AR over the P and PP, the 95% CIs of ΔE00 were < 50%PT.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of a 1.0-mm AR over pink-anodized titanium potentially results in acceptable color matching with 95% CIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145688835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Additively Versus Subtractively Manufactured Endocrowns: Fit, Trueness, and Retention of Zirconia, Resin Composite, and Lithium Disilicate: An In Vitro Study.","authors":"Rafat Sasany, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Pedro Diaz, Marta Revilla-León, Miguel Gómez-Polo","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9543","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated the marginal and internal adaptation, fabrication trueness, and retention of endocrowns made from additively manufactured (AM) glass-filler-reinforced resin composite and zirconia, and subtractively manufactured (SM) advanced lithium disilicate (ALD).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A resin typodont model was scanned to design endocrowns. Sixty restorations (n=20/group) were fabricated using AM composite (Group C), AM zirconia (Group ZrO2), or SM lithium disilicate (Group ALD). All restorations were scanned with the same intraoral scanner; adaptation (marginal and internal gaps) was quantified with cross-sectional measurements, and trueness was analyzed as RMS deviations. Endocrowns were cemented on resin dies, thermomechanically aged, and tested for pull-out forces. One-way ANOVA (α = .05) was used for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ALD showed the lowest marginal (30.81 ±2.45 μm) and internal (33.41 ±2.62 μm) discrepancies, followed by ZrO2 (40.45 ±2.80 μm; 46.23 ±2.20 μm), and C (63.92 ±4.30 μm; 60.34 ±3.30 μm). Significant differences were observed between C and ALD (p=.003; p=.009) and between C and ZrO2 (p=.007; p=.012), but not between ALD and ZrO2 (p=.386; p=.115). Trueness was highest in ALD (38.72 ±3.91 μm), followed by ZrO2 (43.55 ±4.16 μm) and C (51.08 ±4.84 μm), with significant differences between ALD and C (p<.001) and ZrO2 and C (p=.004). ZrO2 showed the highest retention (754 ±211 N), significantly greater than ALD (709 ±208 N; p=.014) and C (634 ± 363 N; p=.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ALD and ZrO2 endocrowns showed superior adaptation and trueness compared to AM composite. ZrO2 exhibited the highest retention. Within the study's limitations, AM-zirconia appears to be a viable alternative to SM lithium disilicate for endocrown fabrication.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145575098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}