Comparative study of interim materials for direct fixed dental prostheses and their fabrication with CAD/CAM technique.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Prosthodontic treatment sometimes requires a long-term interim fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) until the definitive restoration can be cemented. However, some interim materials are weak and do not have an adequate marginal seal.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal fit and fracture strengths of interim FDPs fabricated by using a direct technique with different materials (Structur 3, Trim, and DuraLay) with interim prostheses (Telio CAD) made with a computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy interim FDPs were fabricated by using different materials (Structur 3, Trim, DuraLay, and Telio CAD) on a metal master model. Resin-impregnated, light-polymerizing glass fiber (GrandTEC) was used to reinforce 10 interim FDPs per material fabricated with the direct technique. Interim FDPs were stored at 37°C for 24 hours before thermocycling. Marginal fit was analyzed at 6 points in each interim FDP before and after thermocycling with either 2500 or 5000 cycles. After fracturing the interim FDPs with a universal testing machine, fracture strength, fragments separation, and fracture point were recorded. Marginal fit data were analyzed with 2-way repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA), fracture strength with 1-way ANOVA, and fragments separation and fracture point with the chi-square test at a 99% confidence interval.

RESULTS: All interim materials showed marginal discrepancies over time, but no significant differences were found among groups (P>.001), except in the marginal fit of interim FDPs reinforced with glass fiber (S3F), which showed the smallest marginal gap after 5000 cycles (P<.001). Reinforced interim FDPs (S3F, TMF, and DLF) and CAD/CAM FDPs (TCC) presented a fracture strength ranging between 471.3 ±62.4 N and 531.1 ±150.1 N (P>.001). Finally, significant differences were observed in the fracture point and frequency of separation (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Bis-acryl reinforced with glass fiber showed the least marginal discrepancy. No differences were found between the fracture strengths of interim FDPs fabricated with CAD/CAM system and interim FDPs reinforced with glass fiber. No significant difference in fracture strength was observed between interim FDPs reinforced with glass fiber and prostheses fabricated with CAD/CAM system. However, unreinforced interim FDPs showed the lowest fracture strength.