Production tolerance of conventional and digital workflow in the manufacturing of glass ceramic crowns.

OBJECTIVES: To measure and compare the size of the cement gap of wax and polymer copings and final glass-ceramic crowns, produced from conventional and digital workflows, one additive and one subtractive.

METHODS: Thirty wax copings were made by conventional manual layering technique and modeling wax on stone models with spacer varnish simulating a cement spacer. The wax copings were embedded and press-cast in lithium disilicate glass ceramic. Thirty wax copings were produced by milling from a wax blank, i.e. subtractive manufacturing, and thirty polymer burn-out copings were produced by stereolithography, i.e. additive manufacturing. These copings were embedded and press-cast in lithium disilicate glass ceramic in the same manner as the conventional group. The fit of the wax/polymer copings and subsequent crowns was checked using an impression replica method. Mean values for cement gap for marginal, axial, and occlusal areas were calculated and differences were analyzed using Student's t-test.

RESULTS: There were significant differences in mean values for accuracy/production tolerance among different manufacturing techniques for both production stages: wax and polymer copings and final pressed glass-ceramic crowns. In general, crowns produced from a digital additive workflow showed smaller mean cement gaps than crowns produced from a conventional workflow or a digital subtractive workflow. Additive polymer copings showed significantly smaller cement gaps than milled wax copings (p≤.001) and conventional wax copings (p≤.001) in the axial area. In the occlusal area, both additive polymer copings and conventional wax copings showed significantly smaller cement gaps than milled wax copings (p=.002 and p≤.001 respectively). Crowns produced from conventional manual build-up wax copings showed significantly larger mean cement gaps than crowns produced from milled wax and additively manufactured polymer copings in the marginal and axial areas (p≤.001). Among the crowns with smaller cement gaps, crowns produced from additively manufactured polymer copings showed significantly smaller mean cement gaps than crowns produced from milled wax in the marginal and axial areas (p≤.001). In the occlusal areas, the differences in mean cement gaps were only statistically significant between crowns produced from conventional manual build-up wax copings and crowns produced from milled wax where the latter ones showed smaller mean cement gaps (p=.025).

SIGNIFICANCE: The present study suggests that an additive manufacturing technique produces smaller mean cement gaps in glass-ceramic crowns than a conventional or subtractive manufacturing technique.