Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science:eISSN 2384-4272 pISSN 2384-4353

Table. 1.

Table. 1.

Comparison of marginal and internal fit of interim crowns fabricated with different 3D printers and milling machine

Group Marginal Discrepancy Internal Discrepancy
AMD MG Chamfer Axial Angle Occlusal
Mean (SD) μm
Milling group 104.4 (38.5) 45.5 ab (15.8) 54.9 ab (12.8) 42.3 a (9.4) 74.4 a (16.6) 119 a (23.8)
Zenith U group 99.9 (36.8) 42.1 ab (17.2) 47.9 a (13.9) 75.6 b (20.8) 72 a (28.8) 68.5 b (18.7)
Zenith D group 100.5 (34.2) 28.3 a (7.5) 45.9 a (15.8) 92.3 b (25.4) 46.9 b (18.3) 46.2 b (17.7)
Megagen group 111.3 (34) 53.7 b (24.2) 72.1 b (19.5) 96.5 b (14.3) 76 a (15.7) 54.9 b (19.4)
P 0.812* 0.012* 0.01* < 0.001* 0.01* < 0.001*

*, Determined significance by Kruskal-Wallis test; P < 0.05. Different letters indicate significant differences among fabrication methods by Mann-Whitney U-test and Bonferroni correction method.

J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2020;36:254-61 https://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2020.36.4.254
© 2020 J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci