Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 18, 2025
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Trueness of crowns fabricated by using additively and subtractively manufactured resin-based CAD-CAM materials
Gülce Çakmak1, Ana Maria Rusa2, Mustafa Borga Donmez3
1Senior Research Associate, Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Statement Of Problem:
Advancements in digital dental technologies have enabled the use of different resin-based materials that can be fabricated either additively or subtractively. However, knowledge on the fabrication trueness of these materials is scarce.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the trueness of crowns fabricated by using different resin-based computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) materials.
Material And Methods:
A complete crown for a mandibular right first molar with a 30-μm cement space was designed in standard tessellation language (STL) format. This master STL (MC-STL) was used to fabricate 40 complete crowns with 4 different resin-based CAD-CAM materials and either additive (Crowntec [MS]) or subtractive techniques (Brilliant Crios [BC], breCAM.monoCOM [PMMA], and G-CAM [GR]; n=10). All crowns were digitized with an intraoral scanner (CEREC Primescan SW 5.2) to generate their STL files (TC-STLs). MC-STL and TC-STLs were transferred into a 3-dimensional analysis software program (Medit Link v2.4.4), and a trueness (overall, external, occlusal, intaglio occlusal, and marginal) analysis was performed by using the root mean square (RMS) method. The Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests were performed to analyze data (α=.05).
Results:
The test groups had significantly different deviations on all surfaces (P≤.001). MS crowns had higher overall (P≤.007) and external surface (P≤.001) deviations than GR and PMMA crowns, while the differences between GR and PMMA crowns were not significant (P≥.441). BC crowns had higher external surface deviations than GR crowns (P=.005), higher occlusal deviations than GR and MS crowns (P≤.007), and higher intaglio occlusal deviations than GR and MS crowns (P≤.009). However, BC crowns had lower marginal deviations than MS and GR crowns (P≤.018).
Conclusions:
The brand of resin-based CAD-CAM materials affected the trueness of crowns. Additively manufactured crowns (MS) mostly had lower overall and external surface trueness than the other groups. Nevertheless, the deviation values of occlusal, intaglio occlusal, and marginal trueness were generally small; thus, the effect of the tested materials on clinical crown fit may be negligible.
