M. Herrero-Climent et al. Differences between the Fittings of Dental Prostheses Produced by CAD-CAM and Laser Sintering Processes. J. Funct. Biomater

M. Herrero-Climent, M. Punset, M. Molmeneu, A Brizuela, J. Gil. Differences between the Fittings of Dental Prostheses Produced by CAD-CAM and Laser Sintering Processes. J. Funct. Biomater. 2023, 14(2), 67. OPEN ACCESS

doi: doi.org/10.3390/jfb14020067


Digital dentistry and new techniques for the dental protheses’ suprastructure fabrication have undergone a great evolution in recent years, revolutionizing the quality of dental prostheses. The aim of this work is to determine whether the best horizontal marginal fit is provided by the CAD-CAM technique or by laser sintering. These values have been compared with the traditional casting technique. A total of 30 CAD-CAM models, 30 laser sintering models, and 10 casting models (as control) were fabricated. The structures realized with chromium–cobalt (CrCo) have been made by six different companies, always with the same model. Scanning electron microscopy with a high-precision image analysis system was used, and 10,000 measurements were taken for each model on the gingival (external) and palatal (internal) side. Thus, a total of 1,400,000 images were measured. It was determined that the CAD-CAM technique is the one that allows the best adjustments in the manufacturing methods studied. The laser sintering technique presents less adjustment, showing the presence of porosities and volume contraction defects due to solidification processes and heterogeneities in the chemical composition (coring). The technique with the worst adjustments is the casting technique, containing numerous defects in the suprastructure. The statistical analysis of results reflected the presence of statistically significant gap differences between the three manufacturing methods analyzed (p < 0.05), with the samples manufactured by CAD-CAM and by traditional casting processes being the ones that showed lower and higher values, respectively. No statistically significant differences in fit were observed between the palatal and gingival fit values, regardless of the manufacturing method used. No statistically significant differences in adjustment between the different manufacturing centers were found, regardless of the process used.