4.7 Review

CAD/CAM Ceramic Restorative Materials for Natural Teeth

期刊

JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH
卷 97, 期 10, 页码 1082-1091

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0022034518779759

关键词

computer-aided design; clinical outcomes; ceramics; prosthetic dentistry/prosthodontics; minimally invasive dentistry; aesthetics dental

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Advances in computer-aided design (CAD) / computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) technologies and their ease of application enabled the development of novel treatment concepts for modern prosthodontics. This recent paradigm shift in fixed prosthodontics from traditional to minimally invasive treatment approaches is evidenced by the clinical long-term success of bonded CAD/CAM glass-ceramic restorations. Today, defect-oriented restorations, such as inlays, onlays, and posterior crowns, are predominately fabricated from glass-ceramics in monolithic application. The variety of CAD/CAM ceramic restorative systems is constantly evolving to meet the increased demands for highly aesthetic, biocompatible, and long-lasting restorations. Recently introduced polymer-infiltrated ceramic network CAD/CAM blocks add innovative treatment options in CAD/CAM chairside 1-visit restorations. The material-specific high-edge stability enables the CAD/CAM machinability of thin restoration margins. Full-contour zirconia restorations are constantly gaining market share at the expense of bilayered systems. Advancements in material science and bonding protocols foster the development of novel material combinations or fabrication techniques of proven high-strength zirconia ceramics. CAD/CAM applications offer a standardized manufacturing process resulting in a reliable, predictable, and economic workflow for individual and complex teeth-supported restorations. More evidence from long-term clinical studies is needed to verify the clinical performance of monolithic polymer-infiltrated ceramic network and zirconia teeth-supported minimally invasive and extensive restorations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据