In-vitro study evaluates marginal adaptation of ceramic restorations using digital and conventional impressions, indicating promising results with intraoral scanners.
Background The purpose of this in-vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of digitally fabricated partial coverage ceramic restorations with two designs using conventional impression and intraoral scanners. Methods Forty-eight sound human maxillary first premolars with homogenous dimensions were partitioned into two equal groups (n = 24) based on the overlay preparation design; Group (1): teeth prepared with thin conventional design (D1), Group (2): teeth prepared with MODFL (mesial-occlusal-distal-facial-lingual) design (D2). Based on the method of taking impression, each group was subdivided into 3 subgroups (n = 8); Subgroup (C): conventional impression using polyvinyl siloxane, Subgroup (SC1): scanner type 1 TRIOS 5 (3Shape) and Subgroup (SC2): scanner type 2 Medit i900 (Medit). All fabricated restorations were cemented into corresponding teeth utilizing self-adhesive resin cement (Multilink Speed). All specimens were thermo-cycled for 5000 cycles in a water bath between 5 °C and 55 °C after that marginal adaptation test was done using scan electron microscope. The threshold for statistical significance was established at p ≤ 0.05. Results SC1 demonstrated the lowest mean marginal gap in D1and D2. The Tukey post-hoc multiple comparison test indicated that statistically significant changes in marginal adaption were mostly related to restorations produced using the SC1, especially in D2. Design 2 overlays generated with SC1(D2SC1) exhibited markedly reduced marginal gap values in comparison to those produced by the conventional impression technique (D2C) ( p = 0.017) and in relation to D1SC2 ( p = 0.007), as well as D1 created using the conventional impression method (D1C) ( p = 0.034). Conversely, the majority of pairwise comparisons between conventional impressions(C) and SC2, irrespective of design type, were not statistically significant. Conclusions Digital impressions improved marginal integrity of overlay restorations and offered a clinically effective alternative to conventional silicone impressions within a digital workflow, the TRIOS 5 (3Shape) scanner demonstrated improved marginal adaptation across both preparation designs compared to the other techniques. This may be attributed to its high trueness and precision, as well as its confocal microscopy-based image acquisition technology, with the effect becoming more evident in complex designs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adly et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: