Comparison of Marginal and Internal Fit of CAD/CAM Ceramic Inlay Restorations Fabricated Through Model Scanner, Intraoral Scanner, and CBCT Scans
Applied Sciences (Switzerland), cilt.15, sa.9, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 15 Sayı: 9
- Basım Tarihi: 2025
- Doi Numarası: 10.3390/app15094626
- Dergi Adı: Applied Sciences (Switzerland)
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Aerospace Database, Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, Applied Science & Technology Source, Communication Abstracts, INSPEC, Metadex, Directory of Open Access Journals, Civil Engineering Abstracts
- Anahtar Kelimeler: CBCT, inlay, intraoral scanner, marginal fit, model scanner
- Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Background and Objectives: CBCT images have been successfully used for CAD/CAM crown restorations; however, their use for ceramic inlay restorations remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM ceramic inlay restorations fabricated using intraoral scanner, model scanner, and CBCT data. Materials and Methods: Inlay preparations were performed on 11 mandibular molar typodont teeth. The teeth were scanned using an intraoral scanner, an extraoral scanner, and CBCT (0.075 mm voxel size). CBCT-generated DICOM data were converted to STL format with dedicated software. All scan data were transferred to CAD software, and a total of 33 restorations were designed. Feldspathic ceramic blocks were used for milling. Micro-CT was employed to measure marginal and internal gaps, with 60 measurement points taken from three cross-sections per sample. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Bonferroni tests (p < 0.05). Results: CBCT exhibited greater marginal and internal gap dimensions (mean: 169.27 ± 38.64 μm), which were approximately 60–70 μm higher than those of the intraoral (97.00 ± 10.1 μm) and model scanner groups (109.67 ± 9.72 μm), exceeding clinically acceptable limits (≤120 μm) (p < 0.05). Intraoral and model scanners showed similar, clinically acceptable results. Conclusions: CBCT was less accurate for inlay restorations, likely due to their complex geometry. Nevertheless, fabrication was possible, and further research may improve its clinical applicability.