J Prosthodont. 2021 Jul 26. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13406. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Error testing at each stage of prosthetic manufacturing remains relatively underdeveloped for computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing methods, and no experimental studies have validated the computer-aided design programs. This study aimed to test the accuracy and trueness of the computer-aided design of a three-unit fixed prosthesis.
MATERIALS & METHODS: Three computer-aided design programs (Exocad, Dental System™, and inLab 16) were tested on the designs of a three-unit fixed partial denture, and a three-dimensional analysis program was used to calculate the internal clearance error for the computer-aided design prostheses. The Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hoc tests were used to reveal significant differences in trueness between the three computer-aided design programs (α<0.05).
RESULTS: Dental System™ showed the lowest mean error values for #24 and #26 at the mesial margin (both 0 μm), mesial wall (0.10, 0.12 μm, respectively), occlusal surface (-0.05, 0.10 μm), distal wall (0.23, -0.02 μm), and distal margin (both 0 μm). In sum, except for the mesial margin and distal margin site of tooth #26, the mean error value of Dental System™ was statistically the lowest, followed by those of Exocad and inLab 16 (p<0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of computer-aided design differed according to the type of computer-aided design program: Dental System™ achieved the best trueness at the margins, axial walls, and occlusal surface, followed by Exocad and inLab 16. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
PMID:34310790 | DOI:10.1111/jopr.13406
