Volume 6, Issue 2 (3-2021)
J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2021, 6(2): 36-50 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Eskandarion S, Neshandar M, Rokhshad R. Classifications and Properties of Materials for Chairside Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Dentistry: A Review. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2021; 6 (2) :36-50
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-298-en.html
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-298-en.html
1- Dental Material research center, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ,Rat_shad@yahoo.com
2- Prosthodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran ,
Abstract: (2955 Views)
Background and Aim: Chairside computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems have become considerably more accurate, reliable, efficient, fast, and prevalent since 1985 when CEREC was introduced. The inceptive restorative material option for chairside CAD/CAM restorations was limited to ceramic blocks. Today, restorative material options have been multiplied and include metal alloys, ceramics, oxide ceramics, resins, and resin-matrix ceramics (RMC). This study aimed at making an overview of chairside CAD/CAM system materials and classifications.
Materials and Methods: An electronic search of the literature was carried out mainly through PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google databases. The search aimed at collecting all the relevant English articles from 1965 to 2020.
Results: The analysis of the bond strength, fatigue resistance, flexural strength, elastic constants, microstructural characterization, accuracy, and clinical success of the materials showed variable outcomes. The marginal adaptation of resin ceramics has been reported to be comparable to that of lithium disilicate. It has been reported that the chairside CAD/CAM system using intraoral scanning is at least as accurate as the conventional method.
Conclusion: Chairside CAD/CAM restorations are fast, reliable, predictable, effective, patient-friendly, and cost-effective treatment options. Design software and intraoral scanners have made the treatment procedure simple. Chairside individualization of dental restorations could help improve patient satisfaction. However, considering the limited long-term clinical data, future studies need to address the long-term clinical performance of chairside CAD/CAM materials.
Materials and Methods: An electronic search of the literature was carried out mainly through PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google databases. The search aimed at collecting all the relevant English articles from 1965 to 2020.
Results: The analysis of the bond strength, fatigue resistance, flexural strength, elastic constants, microstructural characterization, accuracy, and clinical success of the materials showed variable outcomes. The marginal adaptation of resin ceramics has been reported to be comparable to that of lithium disilicate. It has been reported that the chairside CAD/CAM system using intraoral scanning is at least as accurate as the conventional method.
Conclusion: Chairside CAD/CAM restorations are fast, reliable, predictable, effective, patient-friendly, and cost-effective treatment options. Design software and intraoral scanners have made the treatment procedure simple. Chairside individualization of dental restorations could help improve patient satisfaction. However, considering the limited long-term clinical data, future studies need to address the long-term clinical performance of chairside CAD/CAM materials.
Type of Study: Review article |
Subject:
Oral medicine
References
1. Emery RW, Merritt SA, Lank K, Gibbs JD. Accuracy of Dynamic Navigation for Dental Implant Placement-Model-Based Evaluation. J Oral Implantol. 2016 Oct;42(5):399-405. [DOI:10.1563/aaid-joi-D-16-00025] [PMID]
2. Al Yafi F, Camenisch B, Al-Sabbagh M. Is Digital Guided Implant Surgery Accurate and Reliable? Dent Clin North Am. 2019 Jul;63(3):381-97. [DOI:10.1016/j.cden.2019.02.006] [PMID]
3. Deeb GR, Allen RK, Hall VP, Whitley D 3rd, Laskin DM, Bencharit S. How Accurate Are Implant Surgical Guides Produced With Desktop Stereolithographic 3-Dimentional Printers? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Dec;75(12):2559.e1-2559.e8. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2017.08.001] [PMID]
4. Unsal GS, Turkyilmaz I, Lakhia S. Advantages and limitations of implant surgery with CAD/CAM surgical guides: A literature review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2020 Apr 1;12(4):e409-e417. [DOI:10.4317/jced.55871] [PMID] [PMCID]
5. Sun TM, Lan TH, Pan CY, Lee HE. Dental implant navigation system guide the surgery future. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2018 Jan;34(1):56-64. [DOI:10.1016/j.kjms.2017.08.011] [PMID]
6. Bencharit S, Staffen A, Yeung M, Whitley D 3rd, Laskin DM, Deeb GR. In Vivo Tooth-Supported Implant Surgical Guides Fabricated With Desktop Stereolithographic Printers: Fully Guided Surgery Is More Accurate Than Partially Guided Surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Jul;76(7):1431-1439. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2018.02.010] [PMID]
7. Block MS, Emery RW. Static or Dynamic Navigation for Implant Placement-Choosing the Method of Guidance. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016 Feb;74(2):269-77. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2015.09.022] [PMID]
8. Stefanelli LV, Mandelaris GA, Franchina A, Pranno N, Pagliarulo M, Cera F, et al. Accuracy of Dynamic Navigation System Workflow for Implant Supported Full Arch Prosthesis: A Case Series. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(14):5038. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17145038] [PMID] [PMCID]
9. Zhou W, Liu Z, Song L, Kuo CL, Shafer DM. Clinical Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Guided Implant Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2018 Mar;18(1):28-40. [DOI:10.1016/j.jebdp.2017.07.007] [PMID]
10. Mora MA, Chenin DL, Arce RM. Software tools and surgical guides in dental-implant-guided surgery. Dent Clin North Am. 2014 Jul;58(3):597-626. [DOI:10.1016/j.cden.2014.04.001] [PMID]
11. Mediavilla Guzmán A, Riad Deglow E, Zubizarreta-Macho Á, Agustín-Panadero R, Hernández Montero S. Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study. J Clin Med. 2019 Dec 2;8(12):2123. [DOI:10.3390/jcm8122123] [PMID] [PMCID]
12. Rawtiya M, Verma K, Sethi P, Loomba K. Application of Robotics in Dentistry Quick Response Code. Indian J Dent Adv. 2014;6:1700-6.
13. Sun TM, Lee HE, Lan TH. The influence of dental experience on a dental implant navigation system. BMC Oral Health. 2019 Oct 17;19(1):222. [DOI:10.1186/s12903-019-0914-2] [PMID] [PMCID]
14. Syed AA, Soomro AM, Khizar AN, Duan X, Qiang H, Manzoor F. Tele-Robotic Assisted Dental Implant Surgery with Virtual Force Feedback. Indones J Electrical Eng Comput Sci. 2014;12(1):450-8. [DOI:10.11591/telkomnika.v12i1.3124]
15. Tan PLB, Layton DM, Wise SL. In vitro comparison of guided versus freehand implant placement: use of a new combined TRIOS surface scanning, Implant Studio, CBCT, and stereolithographic virtually planned and guided technique. Int J Comput Dent. 2018;21(2):87-95.
16. Ganz SD. Three-dimensional imaging and guided surgery for dental implants. Dent Clin North Am. 2015 Apr;59(2):265-90. [DOI:10.1016/j.cden.2014.11.001] [PMID]
17. Casap N, Wexler A, Persky N, Schneider A, Lustmann J. Navigation surgery for dental implants: assessment of accuracy of the image guided implantology system. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004 Sep;62(9 Suppl 2):116-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2004.06.028] [PMID]
18. Fokas G, Vaughn VM, Scarfe WC, Bornstein MM. Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:393-415. [DOI:10.1111/clr.13142] [PMID]
19. Fortin T, Bosson JL, Coudert JL, Isidori M. Reliability of preoperative planning of an image-guided system for oral implant placement based on 3-dimensional images: an in vivo study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Nov-Dec;18(6):886-93.
20. Bolding SL, Reebye UN. Robotic-Guided Dental Implant Placement in Fully Edentulous Patients: Preliminary Results of a Prospective Multi-Center Clinical Study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;78(10) Supplement:e22-e3. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2020.07.064]
21. Naziri E, Schramm A, Wilde F. Accuracy of computer-assisted implant placement with insertion templates. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW. 2016 May 13;5:Doc15.
22. Kusumoto N, Sohmura T, Yamada S, Wakabayashi K, Nakamura T, Yatani H. Application of virtual reality force feedback haptic device for oral implant surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Dec;17(6):708-13. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01218.x] [PMID]
23. DuVall NB. Fabricating a chairside CAD-CAM radiographic and surgical guide for dental implants: A dental technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Jan;125(1):34-40. [DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.019] [PMID]
24. Roig E, Garza LC, Álvarez-Maldonado N, Maia P, Costa S, Roig M, Espona J. In vitro comparison of the accuracy of four intraoral scanners and three conventional impression methods for two neighboring implants. PLoS One. 2020 Feb 27;15(2):e0228266. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0228266] [PMID] [PMCID]
25. Gargallo-Albiol J, Barootchi S, Salomó-Coll O, Wang HL. Advantages and disadvantages of implant navigation surgery. A systematic review. Ann Anat. 2019 Sep;225:1-10. [DOI:10.1016/j.aanat.2019.04.005] [PMID]
26. Vinci R, Manacorda M, Abundo R, Lucchina AG, Scarano A, Crocetta C, et al. Accuracy of Edentulous Computer-Aided Implant Surgery as Compared to Virtual Planning: A Retrospective Multicenter Study. J Clin Med. 2020; 9(3):774. [DOI:10.3390/jcm9030774] [PMID] [PMCID]
27. Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29 Suppl:25-42. [DOI:10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g1.2] [PMID]
28. Geng W, Liu C, Su Y, Li J, Zhou Y. Accuracy of different types of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing surgical guides for dental implant placement. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Jun 15;8(6):8442-9.
29. Tahmaseb A, Wu V, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Evans C. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:416-35. [DOI:10.1111/clr.13346] [PMID]
30. Kasten B, Arastu A, Panchal N. Dental Implant Surgery: From Conventional to Guided to Navigated Approach. Current Oral Health Reports. 2018;5(2):140-6. [DOI:10.1007/s40496-018-0182-2]
31. Sun TM, Lee HE, Lan TH. Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(6):2107. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17062107] [PMID] [PMCID]
32. Kaewsiri D, Panmekiate S, Subbalekha K, Mattheos N, Pimkhaokham A. The accuracy of static vs. dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in single tooth space: A randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jun;30(6):505- [DOI:10.1111/clr.13435] [PMID]
34. Vercruyssen M, Cox C, Coucke W, Naert I, Jacobs R, Quirynen M. A randomized clinical trial comparing guided implant surgery (bone- or mucosa-supported) with mental navigation or the use of a pilot-drill template. J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Jul;41(7):717-23. [DOI:10.1111/jcpe.12231] [PMID]
35. Sreelekshmi S, Varghese K, Abraham JP, Jaysa JJ. Applications Of Robotics In Prosthodontics: A Review. 2017:7(1):198748-198748.
36. Rao YVD, Parimi AM, Rahul DSP, Patel D, Nitin Mythreya YV. Robotics in Dental Implantation. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2017;4(8):9327-32. [DOI:10.1016/j.matpr.2017.07.292]
37. Tahir AM, Jilich M, Trinh DC, Cannata G, Barberis F, Zoppi M. Architecture and design of a robotic mastication simulator for interactive load testing of dental implants and the mandible. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;122(4):389.e1-e8. [DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.023] [PMID]
38. Rawal S, Tillery DE Jr, Brewer P. Robotic-Assisted Prosthetically Driven Planning and Immediate Placement of a Dental Implant. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2020 Jan;41(1):26-30.
39. Bover-Ramos F, Viña-Almunia J, Cervera-Ballester J, Peñarrocha-Diago M, García-Mira B. Accuracy of Implant Placement with Computer-Guided Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Cadaver, Clinical, and In Vitro Studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 January/February;33(1):101-15. [DOI:10.11607/jomi.5556] [PMID]
40. Laederach V, Mukaddam K, Payer M, Filippi A, Kühl S. Deviations of different systems for guided implant surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28(9):1147-51. [DOI:10.1111/clr.12930] [PMID]
41. Sigcho López DA, García I, Da Silva Salomao G, Cruz Laganá D. Potential Deviation Factors Affecting Stereolithographic Surgical Guides: A Systematic Review. Implant Dent. 2019 Feb;28(1):68-73. [DOI:10.1097/ID.0000000000000853] [PMID]
42. Mello CC, Lemos CAA, de Luna Gomes JM, Verri FR, Pellizzer EP. CAD/CAM vs Conventional Technique for Fabrication of Implant-Supported Frameworks: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of In Vitro Studies. Int J Prosthodont. 2019 Mar/Apr;32(2):182-92. [DOI:10.11607/ijp.5616] [PMID]
43. Joda T, Bragger U, Zitzmann NU. CAD/CAM implant crowns in a digital workflow: Five-year follow-up of a prospective clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019 Feb;21(1):169-74. [DOI:10.1111/cid.12681] [PMID]
44. Raico Gallardo YN, da Silva-Olivio IRT, Mukai E, Morimoto S, Sesma N, Cordaro L. Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 May;28(5):602-12. [DOI:10.1111/clr.12841] [PMID]
45. Ozan O, Turkyilmaz I, Ersoy AE, McGlumphy EA, Rosenstiel SF. Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic surgical guides in implant placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Feb;67(2):394-401. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2008.09.033] [PMID]
46. Tallarico M, Kim YJ, Cocchi F, Martinolli M, Meloni SM. Accuracy of newly developed sleeve-designed templates for insertion of dental implants: A prospective multicenters clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019 Feb;21(1):108-113.. [DOI:10.1111/cid.12704] [PMID]
47. Sigcho López DA, García I, Da Silva Salomao G, Cruz Laganá D. Potential Deviation Factors Affecting Stereolithographic Surgical Guides: A Systematic Review. Implant Dent. 2019 Feb;28(1):68-73. [DOI:10.1097/ID.0000000000000853] [PMID]
48. Schubert O, Schweiger J, Stimmelmayr M, Nold E, Güth JF. Digital implant planning and guided implant surgery - workflow and reliability. Br Dent J. 2019 Jan 25;226(2):101-8. [DOI:10.1038/sj.bdj.2019.44] [PMID]
49. Skjerven H, Riis UH, Herlofsson BB, Ellingsen JE. In Vivo Accuracy of Implant Placement Using a Full Digital Planning Modality and Stereolithographic Guides. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Jan/Feb;34(1):124-32. [DOI:10.11607/jomi.6939] [PMID]
50. Henprasert P, Dawson DV, El-Kerdani T, Song X, Couso-Queiruga E, Holloway JA. Comparison of the Accuracy of Implant Position Using Surgical Guides Fabricated by Additive and Subtractive Techniques. J Prosthodont. 2020 Jul;29(6):534-1. [DOI:10.1111/jopr.13161] [PMID]
51. Chen CK, Yuh DY, Huang RY, Fu E, Tsai CF, Chiang CY. Accuracy of Implant Placement with a Navigation System, a Laboratory Guide, and Freehand Drilling. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 Nov/Dec;33(6):1213-8. [DOI:10.11607/jomi.6585] [PMID]
52. Kiatkroekkrai P, Takolpuckdee C, Subbalekha K, Mattheos N, Pimkhaokham A. Accuracy of implant position when placed using static computer-assisted implant surgical guides manufactured with two different optical scanning techniques: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Mar;49(3):377-83. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijom.2019.08.019] [PMID]
53. Siessegger M, Schneider BT, Mischkowski RA, Lazar F, Krug B, Klesper B, Zöller JE. Use of an image-guided navigation system in dental implant surgery in anatomically complex operation sites. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2001 Oct;29(5):276-81. [DOI:10.1054/jcms.2001.0242] [PMID]
54. Bell CK, Sahl EF, Kim YJ, Rice DD. Accuracy of Implants Placed with Surgical Guides: Thermoplastic Versus 3D Printed. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2018 Jan/Feb;38(1):113-9. [DOI:10.11607/prd.3254] [PMID]
55. Lee DH, Mai HN, Li LJ, Lee KW. Accuracy of a CAD/CAM-guided template for locating abutment screws for cement-retained implant-supported restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Jul;116(1):67-73. [DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.007] [PMID]
56. Ma B, Park T, Chun I, Yun K. The accuracy of a 3D printing surgical guide determined by CBCT and model analysis. J Adv Prosthodont. 2018 Aug;10(4):279-85. [DOI:10.4047/jap.2018.10.4.279] [PMID] [PMCID]
57. Zaruba M, Mehl A. Chairside systems: a current review. Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(2):123-49.
58. Rungcharassaeng K, Caruso JM, Kan JY, Schutyser F, Boumans T. Accuracy of computer-guided surgery: A comparison of operator experience. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Sep;114(3):407-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.004] [PMID] [PMCID]
59. Pellegrino G, Bellini P, Cavallini PF, Ferri A, Zacchino A, Taraschi V, et al. Dynamic Navigation in Dental Implantology: The Influence of Surgical Experience on Implant Placement Accuracy and Operating Time. An in Vitro Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(6):2153. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17062153] [PMID] [PMCID]
60. Dehghani M, Montazer lotf elahi H, Moeini M, Bardal R. Comparing the Accuracy of Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Digital Intraoral Radiography and Conventional Intraoral Radiography in the Measurement of Periodontal Bone Defects. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci. 2016;1(1):34-39. [DOI:10.29252/jrdms.1.1.34]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
