ORAL HEALTH EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE PROGRAM
View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
spacer
Title Longevity of Single Tooth Restorations Fabricated Using the CAD/CAM System is Similar to that of Traditional Laboratory Techniques.
Clinical Question In a patient requiring a full coverage crown how does the use of the CAD/CAM system differ from traditional laboratory techniques for crown fabrication in terms of longevity and stability.
Clinical Bottom Line Restorations using a CAD/CAM system have a similar survival rate as traditional all porcelain crowns.
Best Evidence (you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link)
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
#1) 20095195Wittneben/2009Patients receiving CAD/CAM single tooth restorationsSystematic Review
Key resultsCAD/CAM restorations seem to have similar survival rates as traditional restorations. Survival Rate after Five Years for CAD/CAM Crown: 92.3% (Cl = 72.0-98.1); P value = .867
#2) 16950934Fasbinder/2006Patients receiving Crowns fabricated using the CEREC 2 (CAD/CAM) machineReview
Key resultsCEREC-generated restorations have a low rate of restoration fracture and long-term clinical survivability. Kaplan-Meier method survival probability – 91.7% n-Ceram Spinell crowns after 44.7 ± 10.3 months.94.4% percent for Vitablocs Mark II crowns after 44.7 ± 10.3 months.
Evidence Search "Computer-Aided Design"[Mesh] AND "Dental Restoration Failure"[Mesh] Limits: Review
Comments on
The Evidence
The Wittneben study used a Systematic Review using the electronic databases PubMed and Embase searching from 1985 – 2007. Overall 1,957 single tooth restorations were taking into account 106 crowns. The Fasbinder study used a review of clinical studies from 1985 through 2006. No specific numbers were provided as to the number of restorations taken into account in total. It was not a systematic review.
Applicability The results of the reviews can directly relate to these question’s concerns. A restoration, specifically a crown, fabricated using the CAD/CAM technique shows similar survival rates are more traditional laboratory techniques.
Specialty/Discipline (General Dentistry) (Prosthodontics)
Keywords CAD/CAM, Crowns
ID# 2243
Date of submission: 04/12/2012spacer
E-mail chodavadia@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Hardik Chodavadia
Co-author(s)
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author Robert A. Kaminski, DDS, MS
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail KaminskiR@uthscsa.edu
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
post a rationale
None available
spacer
Comments on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS' and/or FACULTY COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs)
post a comment
by Kyle Gopffarth and Anna Stell (San Antonio, TX) on 11/28/2017
A PubMed search was conducted on this clinical question in November 2017. While there have been new systematic reviews conducted concerning the longevity of CAD/CAM restorations, none of these concern full-coverage crowns. One review concerning porcelain veneers looked at 5- and 10-year failure rates, which would be an appropriate measure for full-coverage crowns in order to determine just how comparable CAD/CAM crowns' longevity is to traditional crowns' long-term; however, the systematic review was only able to procure one source for CAD/CAM porcelain veneers. It would also be beneficial to consider the types of materials used for both CAD/CAM and traditional crowns, as they can differ between studies.
spacer

Return to Found CATs list