Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fabrication of complete dentures by computer-aided designing and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) techniques are now common. Subtractive and Additive are the two principal CAD-CAM techniques used for this purpose. However, studies that evaluated the occlusal forces by CDs manufactured by these techniques are lacking.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the occlusal forces in complete dentures fabricated by additive, subtractive and conventional techniques with different occlusal schemes, using computerized occlusal force analysis system [Tech-Scan III (T-Scan III)].
METHODS: Three groups (Gr) were made on the basis of techniques of fabrication of CDs: Conventional CDs (CCD), Subtractive CDs (SCD), and Additive CDs (ACD). Each group CDs were further divided into three sub groups based on occlusion schemes: bilateral balanced occlusion (BBO), lingualized occlusion (LO) and mono plane occlusion (MO). A total of 45 CDs were made: 15 in each group with 5 CDs of each occlusal scheme. For all samples, occlusal force analysis (percentage of occlusal force applied on the right and left sides of the arch, centralization of forces and percentage of maximum occlusal force) was done using computerized occlusal analysis system: T-Scan III. Univariate regression analysis and logistic regression analysis were used to find the effects of the technique of fabrication and occlusion scheme over the occlusal forces (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: The intergroup comparison revealed statistically significant differences ( p < 0.01) in right-left side force difference, maximum bite force in CDs fabricated by various techniques and with different occlusion schemes. Though the effect of occlusion scheme was more than the technique of fabrication (according to effect size estimation). The maximum force difference between right-left side was observed in combination of CCD technique and MO scheme (36.88 +/- 2.82 N). Furthermore, the maximum bite force was observed for SCD technique (89.14 +/- 6.08 N) and LO scheme (92.17 +/- 3.22 N). In comparison to ACD, the chances of centre of force out of ellipse was 2.53 time more in CCS and 0.75 times less in SCD techniques and in comparison to MO, the chances of out of ellipse was 0.298 times less in BBO and 0.396 times less in LO schemes, though these chances were not statistically significant (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The digital CDs fabricated by subtractive technique were proved to be superior to additive technique in terms of occlusal force analysis on tested parameters. However, further research is needed on patients to determine the exact superiority of one technique over the other.