Fit and retention of complete denture bases: Part I - Conventional versus CAD-CAM methods: A clinical controlled crossover study

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Clinical evidence is sparse on whether dentures fabricated by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) methods afford superior fit and retention when compared with those fabricated conventionally.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this clinical controlled crossover study was to evaluate the peak retention force and fit of CAD-CAM manufactured (3D-printed and milled) maxillary complete denture bases and conventional heat-polymerized bases (control).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Twenty participants with edentulous maxillary arches were recruited. Impressions were made with a border-molded custom tray, and the resulting definitive cast was scanned. The conventional base was manufactured on the definitive cast with a hook and a 45-degree platform with a central notch and 2 lateral notches. The scan of the definitive cast was used for the fabrication of a milled and a printed base. The platform and hook position on the conventional base were transferred digitally to the milled and printed bases. All bases were scanned. A traction dynamometer was orientated into the notches, and retention was evaluated in the post dam and tuberosity areas. Scans were imported into a comparison software program which matched scans to their corresponding reference and performed a 3-dimensional comparison. The Friedman and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare between groups (confidence interval: 95%, α=.05).
RESULTS
Nineteen participants with a mean ±standard deviation age of 64.1 ±14.7 years completed all clinical sessions. No significant difference in peak retention was measured between milled (MB1), printed (PB1), and conventional (CB) bases in the post dam (CB: 12.44 ±9.62 N, PB1: 16.08 ±15.28 N, MB1: 14.52 ±17.07 N) and right tuberosity area (CB: 8.99 ±7.82 N, PB1: 11.28 ±9.57 N, MB1: 11.99 ±12.10 N). In the left tuberosity area, peak retention was lower for CB (10.03 ±8.39 N) than PB1 (14.98 ±14.72 N) and MB1 (13.55 ±15.53 N; P=.05). Compared with the definitive cast, the fit of the conventional base (0.18 ±0.01 mm) was closer than the printed (0.21 ±0.03 mm) and milled bases (0.21 ±0.02 mm) (P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The CD bases manufactured by CAD-CAM techniques provided retention and fit similar to that of conventionally manufactured bases and can therefore be considered suitable techniques.