d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 4 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 1311–1315

available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.intl.elsevierhealth.com/journals/dema

Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated

with a new laser melting technology

Katrin Quante a , Klaus Ludwig b , Matthias Kern b,∗

a Private Dental Office, Cologne, Germany
b Department of Prosthodontics, Propaedeutics and Dental Materials, Dental School, Christian-Albrechts University at Kiel, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Objectives. The purpose of this in vivo investigation was to evaluate the marginal and internal
Received 14 December 2007 fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting procedure (BEGO Medical,
Received in revised form Bremen, Germany), and to investigate the influence of ceramic firing on the marginal and
17 February 2008 internal accuracy of these crowns.
Accepted 18 February 2008 Methods. After tooth preparation, impression taking using polyvinylsiloxane and model cast-
ing, each preparation was contact less scanned by strip-light-projection. The finishing line
and the virtual construction of the metal coping were defined by means of a computer. Using
Keywords: CAD/CAM software the metal copings were produced by BEGO Medical (Germany). A base
Laser melting technology metal alloy (Wirobond C) and a precious alloy (BioPontoStar, both: BEGO Medical) were used
Marginal fit in this study with 14 restorations each.
Precision The internal and marginal accuracy of the specimens were examined using a silicone
Ceramic veneered crown indicator paste (Fit Checker, GC, Japan). After setting, the silicone films were embedded in
Marginal discrepancies acrylic resin and sectioned four times. Each slice was photographed digitally at 60× magni-
Internal fit fication for marginal and at 15× magnification for occlusal adaptation, respectively. Using
a light microscope the thickness of the silicone layer was measured at 10 reference points,
a total of 3360 measurements. This procedure was repeated after the ceramic firing in the
dental laboratory and after intraoral adjustment clinically.
Results. No statistically significant differences between the two alloys were found at any time.
The mean marginal discrepancies ranged from 74 to 99 ␮m for both alloys. The internal gaps
ranged from 250 to 350 ␮m. Ceramic firing increased the marginal discrepancies while the
internal gaps decreased especially at occlusal surface. However, only in one case a slight
statistically significance could be determined (p = 0.046).
Significance. The results of this in vivo study show that crowns produced with laser melting
technology exhibit a marginal and internal accuracy that is comparable to conventional
production procedures.
© 2008 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction minimize the plaque accumulation and reduce the chance for
recurrent caries and periodontal disease [1]. A good marginal
The marginal fit of metal-ceramic crowns has been the focus of fit seems to be one of the most important technical fac-
various investigations. An excellent marginal adaptation will tors for the long-term success of metal-ceramic crowns [2].

∗
Corresponding author at: Arnold-Heller-Straße 16, 24105 Kiel, Germany. Tel.: +49 431 5972874; fax: +49 431 5972860.
E-mail address: mkern@proth.uni-kiel.de (M. Kern).
0109-5641/$ – see front matter © 2008 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.02.011
1312 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 4 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 1311–1315

The fit and distortion of the metal-ceramic crowns, includ-

ing how the fit is affected by the fabrication procedures has
2. Material and methods
been intensely scrutinized. Because of the different coeffi-
Twenty-eight patients with the indication for one metal-
cients of thermal expansion between the veneering ceramic
ceramic crown were selected for this study. The study was
and alloy coping, the ceramic firing might affect the marginal
approved by the ethical committee of the University Christian-
fit [3].
Albrechts University at Kiel, Germany. The selected molars
Metal ceramics are still the most widely used material
and premolars were prepared with a circumferential cham-
for fabricating complete coverage crowns and fixed partial
fer finishing line design. Impressions were made with a
dentures [4]. The traditional technique for fabricating the
simultaneous, dual-mix technique using a polyether material
metal substructure is the lost-wax technique and using var-
(Permadyne, 3M Espe, Germany) and poured 1 h after setting.
ious metal alloys for casting. Recently a new CAD/CAM laser
The master dies were cast in die stone type 4 (Fujirock, GC
melting technology (BEGO MEDIFACTURING-SYSTEM, BEGO
Europe, Belgium). The materials were used according to the
Medical, Germany) for the fabrication of metal copings for
manufactures instructions.
metal-ceramic crowns has been introduced (Figs. 1 and 2).
Each master die was scanned using strip-light-projection
However, no clinical data on the marginal and internal fit of
and CAD/CAM software (BEGO MEDIFACTURING-SYSTEM,
metal-ceramic crowns produced by this method is available
BEGO Medical, Germany). The metal copings were designed
yet.
with the CAD software. Using the laser melting technology
Therefore, the purpose of this study was (1) to evaluate the
(BEGO MEDIFACTURING-SYSTEM, BEGO Medical, Germany,
marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated
Figs. 1 and 2) 28 metal copings were fabricated using two types
with a new laser melting technology, (2) to evaluate the influ-
of alloys; 14 copings were made from a cobalt–chromium alloy
ence of the ceramic firing on the fit, and (3) to compare a base
(Co 61.5, Cr 26, Mo 6, W 5, Si 1, Fe 0.5; Wirobond C+, BEGO Med-
metal alloy and a precious alloy when used for the fabrication
ical) and 14 copings were made from a gold platinum alloy (Au
of the copings.
87, Pt 10.6, Zn 1.5, In 0.3, Rh 0.2, Ta 0.2, Mn 0.2; Bio PontoStar,
BEGO Medical). Following fabrication, internal adjustments
were done, when yielded necessary, to fit the non-veneered
copings to the master dies prior to measuring the marginal
and internal discrepancies with a silicone indicator paste.
Marginal and internal discrepancies were measured at
three different times. The first measurement was done prior
to veneering ceramic firing, while the second measurement
was done after the ceramic firing to evaluate the influence of
this process. The same veneering ceramic (IPS d.Sign, Ivoclar-
Vivadent) was used for both alloys. The third measurement
verified the fit of the finished metal-ceramic crowns at the
patient mouth prior to cementation. No internal adjustments
of the copings were done after veneering ceramic firing or at
clinical try-in.
To evaluate and compare the gap dimension between the
crowns and the stone die the marginal and internal openings
were measured by using a white silicone indicator paste (Fit
Checker, GC, Japan). They were fabricated by repositioning the
metal copings, which were coated at the inner surfaces with

Fig. 1 – (A) Scheme of the laser melting technology: (1) laser

beam, (2) laser roll to disperse the substructure material Fig. 2 – Silicone layer fixed on pattern resin and cured to a
and (3) substructure material. (B) Completed metal coping. holder.
 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 4 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 1311–1315
Fig. 3 – Embedded silicone layer sectioned four times in
mesio-distal (1) and bucco-lingual (2–4) directions;
b = buccal; p = palatinal.
the silicone material, on the master dies. During hardening of
the silicone layers the copings were loaded with a constant
pressure of 50 N. Then the silicone layers were embedded in
acrylic resin (Pattern Resin LS, GC, Japan) (Fig. 3) and sectioned
four times in bucco-lingual and mesio-distal directions with
a diamond saw (Fig. 4). Each slice was digitally photographed
(DC 100; Leica, UK) at 60× magnification in the marginal region
of the silicone layer and at 15× magnification in the occlusal
region, respectively. The thickness of the silicone layer was
measured at 10 predefined points (Fig. 5) using a light micro-
scope (M420, Wild, Netherlands) and an image manager (Leica
Image Manager; Leica, UK). This procedure was repeated after
the ceramic firing on the stone cast using again a constant
pressure of 50 N for loading. For final clinical try-in on the nat-
ural teeth firm finger pressure was used to seat the restoration
and to fabricate the silicone layer.
Fig. 4 – Schematic illustration of the measurement points:
×1 = margin1 (crown margin), ×2 = margin2 (200 ␮m above
×1), ×3, ×4, ×7, ×8 = occlusal1; ×5, ×6 = occlusal2.
1313
The measurement points were determined in the follow-
ing way: the first point (×1 = margin1) measured the marginal
gap directly at the crown margin, the second (×2 = margin2)
measured 200 ␮m above the margin. The third to eighth
measurement points were located at the occlusal surface to
represent the internal gap. For the statistical analysis the mea-
surement points were pooled into two groups: occlusal1 = ×3,
×4, ×7, ×8 and occlusal2 = ×5, ×6. All 3360 measurements were
done by the same examiner (author KQ). Data were analyzed
with one-way ANOVA using the statistic program SPSS 10.0 at
a significance level of p ≤ 0.05.
3. Results
Crowns fabricated with the laser melting technology from
two types of alloys yielded a comparable fit. They demon-
strated mean marginal openings in the range of 67–99 ␮m
and an internal gap on the occlusal surface in range of
252–392 ␮m. The mean marginal discrepancies (margin1 = ×1)
prior to ceramic firing were 93 ␮m for the base alloy and 73 ␮m
for the precious alloy, respectively. For the second measure-
ment point (margin2 = ×2) the mean marginal discrepancies
ranged from 76 ␮m for the base alloy to 67 ␮m for the precious
alloy. After the ceramic firing, the mean marginal discrepan-
cies increased to 99 ␮m (margin1) and 108 ␮m (margin2) for
the base alloy, to 90 ␮m (margin1) and 70 ␮m (margin2) for the
precious alloy. The mean clinical fit of the finished crowns
ranged from 80 ␮m (margin1) to 71 ␮m (margin2) (Fig. 5). For
both alloys the increase in the marginal discrepancies caused
by the ceramic firing was not significant with the excep-
tion of measurement point margin2 in the base alloy group
(p = 0.046).
Prior to ceramic firing the occlusal gap between the coping
and the abutment ranged from 252 ␮m (occlusal1) to 284 ␮m
(occlusal2) for the base alloy and from 349 ␮m (occlusal1) to
392 ␮m (occlusal2) for the precious alloy. After ceramic firing
the occlusal gaps ranged from 258 ␮m (occlusal1) to 293 ␮m
(occlusal2) for the base alloy and from 312 ␮m (occlusal1) to
347 ␮m (occlusal2) for the precious alloy. The occlusal fit of the
finished crowns at try-in was in a similar range for both alloys
(base alloy 277–316 ␮m, precious alloy 277–341 ␮m, Fig. 6). Sta-
tistical analyses demonstrated no significant differences in
the marginal discrepancies and the internal fit between the
two alloys at any of the three measurement times.
4. Discussion
The marginal fit of dental restorations is one of the most
important criteria when evaluating the clinical acceptability
of crowns. Although clinical evaluations of marginal discrep-
ancies have their limitations and inherent errors, it seemed
to be important to investigate newly developed fabrication
technologies. Previous studies concerning different materials
and techniques resulted in a wide range of reported values
of marginal and internal fit [5–9]. Replicas of the gap between
the inner surface of the crown and outer tooth surface can be
made with a silicone indicator paste to evaluate discrepan-
cies [10]. Shortcomings of this technique might be the defects
of the silicone material in the area of measurement and
1314 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 4 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 1311–1315

Fig. 5 – Box plot diagram for the marginal fit (location margin1 and margin2). Comparison of the two alloys, before and after
ceramic firing and at clinical try-in; + mean, – median, ⊥ minimum,  maximum, boxes 25th and 75th percentiles.

inaccuracies in the assessment of the film thickness with a
microscope [11].
In the current study the marginal discrepancies and the
internal gap were examined at three different times using a
silicone indicator paste. This technique was chosen because
measurements could be repeated easily after ceramic firing
and at final clinical try-in. The marginal discrepancies were
evaluated after embedding the silicone layer in acrylic resin
for stabilization and sectioning the specimen into four slices.
The seating pressure for fabrication of the silicone layers on
the stone cast was standardized to 50 N. However, during clin-
ical try-in only non-standardized finger pressure was used,
which might have exceeded 50 N as indicated by a previous
study which found that firm finger pressure resulted in seating
forces of 78.5 ± 12.8 N [12]. However, the possible difference in
seating forces did not result in significantly different silicone
layers.
Various authors have evaluated the marginal accuracy of
cast and CAD/CAM fabricated crowns [13,14]. However, no gen-
erally accepted value for the marginal fit of crowns exists and
the clinical relevance of the size of marginal discrepancies
is discussed controversially [15–17]. Most clinicians would be
contended with marginal openings of 50 ␮m or less and proba-
bly deem a fit of 100 ␮m clinically acceptable [15]. Others agree
that marginal discrepancies in the range of 100 ␮m seem to
be clinically acceptable with regard to the longevity of the

Fig. 6 – Box plot diagram for the occlusal gaps (location occlusal1 (pooled data for ×3, ×4, ×7, ×8) and occlusal2 (pooled data
for ×5 and ×6)). Comparison of the two metal alloys, before and after ceramic firing and at clinical try-in; + mean, – median,
⊥ minimum,  maximum, boxes 25th and 75th percentiles.
 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 4 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 1311–1315
restorations [16]. McLean and von Fraunhofer [17] concluded
in a 5-year clinical study of 1000 restorations that 120 ␮m was
the maximum acceptable marginal opening. The data of the
present study shows that both alloys achieved to all examina-
tion times a marginal fit in the suggested range.
Depending on the type of cement marginal discrepancies of
castings might increase between 15 ␮m and more than 55 ␮m
through cementation as compared to the same castings seated
without medium in the luting gap [18]. However, marginal
discrepancies of castings seated with a light-bodied silicone
indicator paste were comparable to those of the same cast-
ings cemented with zinc phosphate cement [19]. Therefore,
although not evaluated in the current study, it can be assumed
that the marginal discrepancies of the cemented restorations
will have been in a similar range as measured with the silicone
indicator paste.
For crown fabrication two different types of alloy were used
as a base metal alloy and a precious alloy, which have different
mechanical properties, which might influence the marginal
and internal accuracy. Furthermore different coefficients of
thermal expansion of the alloys (14.2 × 10−6 K−1 for the base
alloy, 14.4 × 10−6 K−1 for the precious alloy) and the ceramic
(12.0–12.6 × 10−6 K−1 ) could be responsible for alterations in
marginal and internal fit [20].
The data of the present study show that the ceramic firing
altered the fit of the crowns only slightly. However, all speci-
mens, regardless of alloy type showed an increase in marginal
openings after ceramic firing, whereas this increase was not
statistically significant (p > 0.05). The decrease of the occlusal
gap after ceramic firing might be explained by a cervical move-
ment of the crown due to the dimensional changes. These
changes confirm that the application of veneering ceramic
distorts the metal substructure [21].
5. Conclusions
Within the limitations of this in vivo investigation, the follow-
ing conclusions can be drawn:
1. Crowns fabricated with laser melting technology have a
clinical fit within an acceptable range.
2. The alloy type did not influence the fit significantly.
Acknowledgments
This investigation was supported by BEGO Medical, Bremen,
Germany. We are grateful to J. Hedderich, Institute for Medi-
cal Informatics and Statistics, Christian-Albrechts University,
Kiel, Germany for his advice regarding the statistical analysis.
references
[1] White SN, Sorensen JA, Kang SK, Caputo AA. Microleakage
of a new crown and fixed partial denture luting agent. J
Prosthet Dent 1992;67:156–61.
1315
[2] Hunter AJ, Hunter AR. Gingival margins for crowns: a review
and discussion. Part 2. Discrepancies and configurations. J
Prosthet Dent 1990;64:636–42.
[3] Ludwig K. Lexikon der zahnmedizinischen Werkstoffkunde.
Berlin: Quintessenz; 2005. pp. 30–2.
[4] Petteno D, Schierano G, Bassi F, Bresciano ME, Carossa S.
Comparison of marginal fit of 3 different metal-ceramic
systems: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont 2000;5:405–
8.
[5] Belser UC, MacEntee MI, Richter WA. Fit of three
porcelain-fused-to-metal marginal designs in vivo. A
scanning electron microscopy study. J Prosthet Dent
1985;53:24–9.
[6] Al Wazzan KA, Al-Nazzawi AA. Marginal and internal
adoption of commercially pure titanium and
titanium–aluminium–vanadium alloy cast restorations. J
Contemp Dent Pract 2007;8:19–26.
[7] Witkowski S, Komine F, Gerds T. Marginal accuracy of
titanium copings fabricated by casting and CAD/CAM
techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96:47–52.
[8] Jesus Suarez M, Lozano JF, Paz Salodo M, Martinez F.
Marginal fit of titanium metal-ceramic crowns. Int J
Prosthodont 2005;18:390–1.
[9] Valderrama S, Van Roekel N, Andersson M, Goodacre CJ,
Munoz CA. A comparison of the marginal and internal
adaptation of titanium and gold-platinum-palladium metal
ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1995;8:29–
37.
[10] Karlsson S. The fit of Procera titanium crowns. A in vitro and
clinical study. Acta Odontol Scand 1993;51:129–
34.
[11] Böning K, Wolf B, Schmidt A, Kästner K, Walter M. Klinische
Randspaltmessungen an Procera AllCeram-Kronen. Dtsch
Zahnärztl Z 2000;55:97–100.
[12] Weaver JD, Johnson GH, Bales DJ. Marginal adaptation of
castable ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66:747–53.
[13] Bindl A, Mormann WH. Marginal and internal fit of
all-ceramic CAD/CAM crown-copings on chamfer
preparations. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:441–
6.
[14] Nakamura T, Dei N, Kojima T, Wakabayashi K. Marginal and
internal fit of Cerec 3 CAD/CAM all-ceramic crowns. Int J
Prosthodont 2003;16:244–8.
[15] Holmes JR, Sulik WD, Bayne SC. Marginal fit of castable
ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:594–9.
[16] Fransson B, Olio G, Gjeitanger R. The fit of metal-ceramic
crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1985;1:197–9.
[17] McLean JM, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement
film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J
1971;131:107–11.
[18] Kern M, Schaller H-G, Strub JR. Marginal fit of restorations
before and after cementation in vivo. Int J Prosthodont
1993;6:585–91.
[19] Davis SH, Kelly JR, Campbell SD. Use of an elastomeric
material to improve the occlusal seat and marginal seal of
cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:288–
91.
[20] Schwickerath H. Der Einfluss unterschiedlicher
Wärmeausdehnungskoeffizienten auf das Verhalten
metallkeramischer Konstruktionen. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z
1983;38:554–6.
[21] Gemalmaz D, Alkumru NH. Marginal fit change during the
porcelain firing cycles. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73:49–
54.