Marginal and internal fit of fixed prosthodontic constructions: a literature review


Marginal and internal fit of fixed prosthodontic constructions: a literature review


Artak G. Heboyan- Msc, DSD, PhD

Researcher, Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Yerevan State Medical University after M. Heratsi; Yerevan, Armenia


American Journal of Geographical Research and Reviews

Marginal fit of fixed dental prostheses is determined by the size of the gap between the margin of the restoration and finish line of the prepared tooth. The most important factors influencing marginal and internal fit of fixed dental prostheses are the material used, the type of finish line as well as peculiarities of various technique of restoration fabrication. The objective of the article is to review the literature about the marginal and internal fit of various fixed prosthetic constructions. A review of literature using Pubmed, Google Scholar, and Research Gate database was carried out and 73 articles mostly in English were selected. The keywords were “Computer-aided design, marginal gap, internal fit, marginal fit, and crown adaptation”. Clinically accepted boundary value of marginal gap is considered to be ≤100 μm. However, a number of factors such as milling machine, parameters of bur (diameter, sharpness), software, design preparation, smooth preparation margins and incorporation of rounded line angles on the tooth preparation, the type of finish line, material and fabrication method of the construction and type of impression method should be taken into consideration in order to achieve these results. The perfect marginal and internal fit are the guarantee of construction success and longevity. As a sizeable marginal opening concedes more plaque accumulation, gingival sulcular fluid flow and bone loss, following in microleakage, recurrent caries, periodontal disease and a decrease in the longevity of the prosthetics restorations. Currently used techniques of restoration manufacturing, including constructions manufactured by computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing system can provide clinically allowable marginal fit.


Keywords: all ceramic, metal ceramic, marginal fit, marginal gap, internal adaptation

Free Full-text PDF


How to cite this article:
Artak G. Heboyan.Marginal and internal fit of fixed prosthodontic constructions: a literature review. International Journal of Dental Research and Reviews, 2019, 2:19. DOI: 10.28933/ijdrr-2019-06-1105


References:
1. Kokubo Y, Ohkubo C, Tsumita M, Miyashita A, Vult von Steyern P, Fukushima S. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of Procera All Ceram crowns. J Oral Rehabil. 2005;32(7):526-30.
2. Tsitrou EA, Northeast SE, van Noort R. Evaluation of the marginal fit of three margin designs of resin composite crowns using CAD/CAM. J Dent. 2007;35(1):68-73.
3. Baig MR, Tan KB, Nicholls JI. Evaluation of the marginal fit of a zirconia ceramic computer-aided machined (CAM) crown system. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104(4):216-27.
4. Limkangwalmongkol P, Chiche GJ, Blatz MB. Precision of fit of two margin designs for metal-ceramic crowns. J Prosthodont. 2007;16(4):233-37.
5. Schaefer O, Watts DC, Sigusch BW, Kuepper H, Guentsch A. Marginal and internal fit of pressed lithium disilicate partial crowns in vitro: A three-dimensional analysis of accuracy and reproducibility. Dent Mater 2012;28(3):320-26.
6. Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;98:389-404.
7. Bottino MA, Valandro LF, Buso L, Ozcan M. The influence of cervical finish line, internal relief, and cement type on the cervical adaptation of metal crowns. Quintessence Int 2007;38:e425-32.
8. Zhou Y, Li Y, Ma X, Huang Y, Wang J. Role of span length in the adaptation of implant–supported cobalt chromium frameworks fabricated by three techniques. The journal of advanced prosthodontics. 2017;9(2):124–9.
9. Sakrana AA. In vitro evaluation of the marginal and internal discrepancies of different esthetic restorations. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2013;21(6):575–80. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679775720130064
10. Zimmer, S.; Gohlich, O.; Ruttermann, S.; Lang, H.; Raab, W. H.; Barthel, C. R., Long–term survival of Cerec restorations: a 10–year study. Oper. Dent. 2008;33,484–487. https://doi.org/10.2341/07-142
11. Chatterjee U. Margin designs for esthetic restoration: An overview. Journal of Advanced Oral Research 2012;3(1):7-12.
12. An S, Kim S, Choi H, Lee JH, Moon HS. Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1171-1175.
13. Alghazzawi TF, Al-Samadani KH, Lemons J, Liu PR, Essig ME, Bartolucci AA, et al.. Effect of imaging powder and CAD/CAM stone types on the marginal gap of zirconia crowns. J Am Dent Assoc 2015;146:111-120.
14. Contrepois M, Soenen A, Bartala M, Laviole O. Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2013;110:447-454 e410.
15. Colpani JT, Borba M, Della Bona A. Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of ceramic crown copings. Dent Mater 2013;29:174-180.
16. Reich S, Uhlen S, Gozdowski S, Lohbauer U. Measurement of cement thickness under lithium disilicate crowns using an impression material technique. Clin Oral Investig 2011;15:521-526.
17. Rahme HY, Tehini GE, Adib SM, Ardo AS, Rifai KT. In vitro evaluation of the “replica technique” in the measurement of the fit of Procera crowns. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008;9:25-32.
18. Takeichi T, Katsoulis J, Blatz MB. Clinical outcome of single porcelain-fused-to-zirconium dioxide crowns: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110:455-61.
19. Dima R. Esthetics and biocompatibility of ceramic versus composite dental laminates. Timisoara Med J 2011;61(1-2):102-106.
20. Von Steryern PV, Jönsson O, Nilner, K. Five-year evaluation of posterior all-ceramic three-unit (In-Ceram) FPDs. Int J Prosthodont. 2001;14(4):379-84.
21. Bodereau EF. Aesthetic All-ceramic Restorations. CAD-CAM System. Int. J. Odontostomat. 2013;7(1):139-47.
22. Yucel MT, Aykent F, Avunduk MC. In vitro evaluation of the marginal fit of different all-ceramic crowns. Journal of Dental Sciences 2013;8(3):225-30.
23. Limkangwalmongkol P, Kee E, Chiche GJ, Blatz MB. Comparison of marginal fit between all-porcelain margins versus alumina-supported margin on Procera Alumina crowns. J Prosthodont 2009;18(2):162-66.
24. Demir N, Ozturk AN, Malkoc MA. Evaluation of the marginal fit of full ceramic crowns by the micro computed tomography (micro CT) technique. Eur J Dent 2014;8(4):437-44.
25. Pelekanos S, Koumanou M, Koutayas SO, Zinelis S, Eliades G. Micro-CT evaluation of the marginal fit of different In-Ceram alumina copings. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2009;4:278-92.
26. Denissen H, Dozic A, van der Zel J, van Waas M. Marginal fit and short-term clinical performance of porcelain-veneered CICERO, CEREC, and Procera onlays. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84:506-13.
27. Groten M, Axmann D, Pröbster L, Weber H. Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in vitro testing. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2000;31;83(1):40–9.
28. Felden A, Schmalz G, Hiller KA. Retrospective clinical study and survival analysis on partial ceramic crowns: results up to 7 years. Clin Oral Investig. 2000;4:199-205.
29. Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M. Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 2008;24:1311-5.
30. Polansky R, Heschl A, Arnetzl G, Haas M, Wegscheider W. Comparison of the marginal fit of different all-ceramic and metal-ceramic crown systems: an in vitro study. International Journal of Stomatology & Occlusion medicine 2010;3(2):106-10.
31. Bronson MR, Lindquist TJ, Dawson DV. Clinical acceptability of crown margins versus marginal gaps as determined by predoctoral students and prosthodontists. J Prosthodont 2005;14(4):226-32.
32. Yeo IS, Yang JH, Lee JB. In vitro marginal fit of three all-ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90(5):459-64
33. Faot F, Suzuki D, Senna PM, da Silva WJ, de Mattias Sartori IA. Discrepancies in marginal and internal fits for different metal and alumina infrastructures cemented on implant abutments. Eur J Oral Sci 2015;123:215-219.
34. Krämer N, Frankenberger R. Clinical performance of bonded leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years. Dent Mater. 2005;21:262-71.
35. Federlin M, Krifka S, Herpich M, Hiller KA, Schmalz G. Partial ceramic crowns: Influence of ceramic thickness, preparation design and luting material on fracture resistance and marginal integrity in vitro. Operative Dentistry. 2007;32(3):251-60.
36. Zhang Y, Kim JW, Bhowmick S, Thompson VP, Rekow ED. Competition of fracture mechanisms in monolithic dental ceramics: flat model systems. Journal of bio-medical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials. 2009;88:402.
37. Gomes EA, Assunção WG, Rocha EP, Santos PH. Cerâmicas odontológicas: o estado atual. Cerâmica. 2008;54:319-25.
38. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J. 2008;204(9):505-11.
39. Karatas ̧li O, Kurso_glu P, Capa N, Kazazo E. Comparison of the marginal fit of different coping materials and designs produced by computer aided manufacturing systems. Dent Mater J. 2011;30:97-102.
40. Tan PL, Gratton DG, Diaz-Arnold AM, Holmes DC. An in vitro comparison of vertical marginal gaps of CAD/CAM titanium and conventional cast restorations. J Prosthodont. 2008;17:378-83.
41. Siadat H, Mirfazaelian A, Alikhasi M. Scanning electron microscope evaluation of marginal discrepancy of gold and base metal implant-supported prostheses with three fabrication methods. J Prosthet Dent 2008;8:148-53.
42. Reich S, Gozdowski S, Trentzsch L, Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U. Marginal fit of heat-pressed vs. CAD/CAM processed all-ceramic onlays using a milling unit prototype. Oper Dent. 2008;33:644-50.
43. Ushiwata O, de Moraes JV. Method for marginal measurements of restorations: Accessory device for toolmakers microscope. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83:362-6.
44. Keshvad A, Hooshmand T, Asefzadeh F, Khalilinejad F, Alihemmati M, Van Noort R. Marginal gap, internal fit, and fracture load of leucite-reinforced ceramic inlays fabricated by CEREC inLab and hot-pressed techniques. J Prosthodont. 2011;20:535-40.
45. Guess PC, Vagkopoulou T, Zhang, Y, Wolkewitz M, Strub JR. Marginal and internal fit of heat pressed versus CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic onlays after exposure to thermomechanical fatigue. J Dent. 2014;42(2):199-209.
46. Neves FD, Prado CJ, Prudente MS, Carneiro TAPN, Zancopé K, Davi LR et al. Micro-computed tomography evaluation of marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated by using chairside CAD/CAM systems or the heat-pressing technique. J Prost het Dent. 2014;112:1134-40.
47. Mously HA, Finkelman M, Zandparsa R, Hirayama H. Marginal and internal adaptation of ceramic crown restorations fabricated with CAD/CAM technology and the heat-press technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112:249-56.
48. Freire Y, Gonzalo E, Lopez-Suarez C, Suarez MJ. The Marginal Fit of CAD/CAM Monolithic Ceramic and Metal-Ceramic Crowns. Journal of Prosthodon-tics. 2017:1-6.
49. Prasad R, Al-Kheraif AA. Three-dimensional accuracy of CAD/CAM titanium and ceramic superstructures for implant abutments using spiral scan microtomography. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:451-7.
50. Euán R, Figueras-Álvarez O, Cabratosa-Termes J, Oliver-Parra R. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112:155-62.
51. Kale E, Seker E, Yilmaz B, Özcelik TB. Effect of cement space on the marginal fit of CAD-CAM-fabricated monolithic zirconia crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:890-5.
52. Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest. 2015, DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1504-6.
53. Tsirogiannis P, Reissmann DR, Heydecke G. Evaluation of the marginal fit of single-unit, complete-coverage ceramic restorations fabricated after digital and conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:328-35.
54. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Thomas GW, Qian F. 3D and 2D Marginal Fit of Pressed and CAD/CAM Lithium Disilicate Crowns Made from Digital and Conventional Impressions. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2014;23:610-7.
55. Tamac E., Toksavul S., Toman M. Clinical marginal and internal adaptation of CAD/CAM milling, laser sintering, and cast metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent, 2014;112:4:909–913 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.020
56. Schönberger J, Erdelt K, Bäumer D, Beuer F. Marginal and internal fit of posterior three-unit fixed zirconia dental prostheses fabricated with two different CAD/CAM systems and materials. Clin Oral Invest, 2017, DOI 10.1007/s00784-017-2064-8.
57. Karl M, Graef F, Wichmann M, Krafft T. Passivity of fit of CAD/CAM and copy-milled frameworks, veneered frameworks, and anatomically contoured, zirconia ceramic, implant-supported fixed prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2012;107: 232-238.
58. Souza RO, Ozcan M, Pavanelli CA, Buso L, Lombardo GH, Michida SM, et al. Marginal and internal discrepancies related to margin design of ceramic crowns fabricated by a CAD/CAM system. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2012;21:94-100.
59. Paniz G, Kim Y, Abualsaud H, Hirayama H. Influence of framework design on the cervical color of metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2011;106(5):310-18.
60. Hilgert E, Buso L, Neisser MP, Bottino MA. Evaluation of marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns depending on the marginal design and the addition of ceramic. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences. 2004;3:619–23.
61. Jalali H, Sadighpour L, Miri A, Shamshiri, AR. Comparison of Marginal Fit and Fracture Strength of a CAD/CAM Zirconia Crown with Two Preparation Designs. Journal of Dentistry Tehran University of Medical Sciences. 2015;12:874-81.
62. Miura S, Inagaki R, Kasahara S, Yoda M. Fit of zirconia all-ceramic crowns with different cervical margin designs, before and after porcelain firing and glazing. Dent Mater J. 2014;33(4):484-89.
63. Euán R, Figueras-Álvarez O, Cabratosa-Termes J, Brufau-de Barberà M, Gomes-Azevedo S. Comparison of the marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide crowns in preparations with two different finish lines. J Prosthodont 2012; 21(4): 291-95.
64. Souza RO, Özcan M, Pavanelli CA, Buso L, Lombardo GH, Michida SM, Mesquita AM, Bottino MA. Marginal and internal discrepancies related to margin design of ceramic crowns fabricated by a CAD/CAM system. J Prosthodont 2012;21(2):94-100.
65. Abdullah AO, Tsitrou EA, Pollington S. Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns. J Appl Oral Sci. 2016;24(3):258-63.
66. Ahmad Ghahremanloo; Mohsen Movahedzadeh; Abdollah Javan Rashid. The evaluation and comparison of marginal adaptation in metal ceramic and all ceramic restorations fabricated by two methods: CAD/CAM and conventional. Journal of dental materials and techniques. 2018;7:2:53-62 10.22038/JDMT.2018.10501
67. Renne W, McGill ST, Forshee KV, DeeFee MR, Mennito AS. Predicting marginal fit of CAD/CAM crowns based on the presence or absence of common preparation errors. J Prosthet Dent. 2012;108:310-5.
68. Sadan A, Blatz MB, Lang B. “Clinical considerations for densely sintered alumina and zirconia restorations—part 1”. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry. 2005;25(3):213-9.
69. Abduo J, Lyons K, Bennamoun M. Trends in Computer-Aided Manufacturing in Prosthodontics: A Review of the Available Streams. International Journal of Dentistry. 2014, ID 783948.
70. Örtorp A, Jönsson D, Mouhsen A, Vult von Steyern P, The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a comparative in vitro study. Dental Materials. 2011;27(4):356-63.
71. Kikuchi M, Okuno O, “Machinability evaluation of titanium alloys,” Dental Materials Journal. 2004;23(1):37-45.
72. Hilgert E, Buso L, Neisser MP, Bottino MA. Evaluation of marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns depending on the marginal design and the addition of ceramic. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences. 2004;3:619–23.
73. Nawafleh NA, Mack F, Evans J, Mackay J, Hatamleh MM. Accuracy and reliability of methods to measure marginal adaptation of crowns and FDPs: a literature review. J Prosthodont. 2013;22:419-28.