Differences in Volumetric Tooth Loss for Monolithic Ceramic Crowns, Occlusal Overlays, and Partial-Coverage Onlays
PURPOSE: To compare the volumetric loss of clinical crown structure in commonly encountered clinical situations for monolithic ceramic crowns, occlusal overlays, and partial-coverage onlays.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Typodont teeth made with preexisting mesio-occlusodistal (MOD) preparations for mandibular first molars and maxillary first premolars were prepared with three different preparations: a full-contour monolithic zirconia crown, a lithium disilicate occlusal overlay, and mesio-occlusodistobuccal/mesio-occlusodistolingual (MODB/MODL) lithium disilicate onlays for premolars and molars. 3D-metrologic software was used to evaluate the volumetric loss of clinical crown structure for each preparation type. Subsequently, the mesiolingual cusps of mandibular molars and buccal cusps of maxillary premolars were excluded for a separate analysis to simulate patient presentation with an existing restoration and sheared-off cusp.
RESULTS: Full-coverage monolithic zirconia crowns removed 45.37 to 219.53 mm3 of the remaining clinical tooth structure, depending on the clinical scenario and tooth position, while lithium disilicate overlays removed 27.48 to 105.13 mm3 and MODB/MODL lithium disilicate onlays removed 5.48 to 47.45 mm3. In each scenario tested, MODB/MODL onlays removed significantly less clinical crown structure than overlays (P < .001); both MODB/MODL onlays and overlays removed significantly less structure than full-coverage crowns (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Monolithic zirconia crown restorations require significantly more removal of remaining tooth structure than lithium disilicate occlusal overlays and partial-coverage onlays for commonly occurring clinical situations requiring indirect restorations.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:37 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
The International journal of prosthodontics - 37(2024), 2 vom: 22. Apr., Seite 181-189 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Stevens, Clinton D [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
12001-21-7 |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 23.04.2024 Date Revised 24.04.2024 published: Print Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.11607/ijp.8011 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM357380916 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM357380916 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240424231831.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.11607/ijp.8011 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1385.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM357380916 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)37235829 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Stevens, Clinton D |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Differences in Volumetric Tooth Loss for Monolithic Ceramic Crowns, Occlusal Overlays, and Partial-Coverage Onlays |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 23.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 24.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a PURPOSE: To compare the volumetric loss of clinical crown structure in commonly encountered clinical situations for monolithic ceramic crowns, occlusal overlays, and partial-coverage onlays | ||
| 520 | |a MATERIALS AND METHODS: Typodont teeth made with preexisting mesio-occlusodistal (MOD) preparations for mandibular first molars and maxillary first premolars were prepared with three different preparations: a full-contour monolithic zirconia crown, a lithium disilicate occlusal overlay, and mesio-occlusodistobuccal/mesio-occlusodistolingual (MODB/MODL) lithium disilicate onlays for premolars and molars. 3D-metrologic software was used to evaluate the volumetric loss of clinical crown structure for each preparation type. Subsequently, the mesiolingual cusps of mandibular molars and buccal cusps of maxillary premolars were excluded for a separate analysis to simulate patient presentation with an existing restoration and sheared-off cusp | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Full-coverage monolithic zirconia crowns removed 45.37 to 219.53 mm3 of the remaining clinical tooth structure, depending on the clinical scenario and tooth position, while lithium disilicate overlays removed 27.48 to 105.13 mm3 and MODB/MODL lithium disilicate onlays removed 5.48 to 47.45 mm3. In each scenario tested, MODB/MODL onlays removed significantly less clinical crown structure than overlays (P < .001); both MODB/MODL onlays and overlays removed significantly less structure than full-coverage crowns (P < .001) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: Monolithic zirconia crown restorations require significantly more removal of remaining tooth structure than lithium disilicate occlusal overlays and partial-coverage onlays for commonly occurring clinical situations requiring indirect restorations | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Comparative Study | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Dental Porcelain |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 12001-21-7 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a lithia disilicate |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Zirconium |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a C6V6S92N3C |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a zirconium oxide |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a S38N85C5G0 |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Couso-Queiruga, Emilio |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Blen, Danubio |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Renné, Walter G |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t The International journal of prosthodontics |d 1995 |g 37(2024), 2 vom: 22. Apr., Seite 181-189 |w (DE-627)NLM012713457 |x 1942-4426 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:37 |g year:2024 |g number:2 |g day:22 |g month:04 |g pages:181-189 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/ijp.8011 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 37 |j 2024 |e 2 |b 22 |c 04 |h 181-189 | ||