RESEARCH AND EDUCATION

Influence of ceramic firing on marginal gap accuracy and

metal-ceramic bond strength of 3D-printed Co-Cr frameworks
Adolfo Di Fiore, DDS, PhD,a Gianpaolo Savio, MScEng, PhD,b Edoardo Stellini, DDS,c Paolo Vigolo, DMD, MSD,a
Carlo Monaco, DDS, MScPhD,d and Roberto Meneghello, MScEng, PhDe

ABSTRACT
Statement of problem. The marginal gap and ceramic bond strength of metal-ceramic restorations are important for success. However,
studies evaluating the marginal gap and ceramic bond strength of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) produced with 3D printing technologies
such as selective laser melting (SLM) are scarce.
Purpose. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the marginal gap of cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) alloy frameworks produced by
SLM technology before and after ceramic firing. Additionally, the metal-ceramic bond strength was evaluated with the Schwickerath
crack-initiation test according to the International Standards Organization (ISO) 9693-1:2012.
Material and methods. Conventional impressions were made, and the definitive cast of a patient requiring a 4-unit FPD was scanned. After
designing the FPD, the files were sent to a service center for the fabrication of a metal master model, 80 Co-Cr frameworks, and 80 flat
specimens (25×3×0.5 mm) with SLM technology. The marginal gap between frameworks and the abutment tooth of the metal master
model was nondestructively measured by using an optical coordinate-measuring machine. A total of 80 sets, consisting of 1 framework
and 1 flat specimen, were sent to 80 dental laboratory technicians for ceramic firing. Detailed instructions for correct manipulation of the
framework and flat specimen were provided. The marginal gap was remeasured, and the 3-point bend test was used to evaluate
metal-ceramic bond strength.
Results. Only 28 of the 80 dental technicians returned the specimens within a prespecified time and/or in adequate condition. The mean
±standard deviation marginal gap of the framework before ceramic firing was 25 ±9 mm and 34 ±12 mm after firing. The difference was
statistically significant (P=.001). The mean ±standard deviation 3-point bend strength was 33 ±9 MPa.
Conclusions. Ceramic firing affected the marginal gap; however, all Co-Cr frameworks had a marginal gap lower than 120 mm, which is
reported to be a clinically acceptable limit. Most of the specimens (80%) had a metal-ceramic bond strength value higher
than the 25-MPa ISO 9693 requirement. Five of 28 dental laboratory technicians were not able to comply with ceramic firing
instructions. (J Prosthet Dent 2019;-:---)

Marginal gap and bond strength between the ceramic
and the metal framework are important factors affecting
the success and survival of metal-ceramic fixed partial
dentures (FPDs).1-3 A marginal gap of less than 120 mm
has been reported to be clinically acceptable.4-6 Poor
prosthesis fabrication may increase marginal gap with
biological complications such as secondary caries or
periodontal inflammation or mechanical complications
such as veneer chipping.2,3,7
Cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) alloy is commonly used to
fabricate FPD frameworks because of its excellent
mechanical properties, durability, and low cost.8

The authors have no commercial or financial dealings that may pose a conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest.
a
Adjunct Professor, Department of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
b
Assistant Professor, Departments of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
c
Full Professor and Head of Dental Clinic and School of Dentistry, Department of Neurosciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
d
Researcher and Assistant Professor, Division of Prosthodontics and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DIBINEM), Alma
Mater Studiorum - University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
e
Associate Professor, Departments of Management and Engineering, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY 1

2 Volume
Clinical implications
The marginal gap of frameworks fabricated by using
the selective laser melting technology before and
after ceramic firing was clinically acceptable;
however, not all dental technicians were able to
follow ceramic firing instructions with regard to
metal-ceramic bond strength requirements.
Conventional lost-wax technology is problematic for Co-
Cr FPD frameworks,9 with difficulty in achieving
adequate accuracy.10,11 Computer-aided design and
computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technolo-
gies have replaced many traditional prosthetic proced-
ures, including the casting process, with benefits that
include avoidance of human error.12,13
Both subtractive machining and additive
manufacturing have been used for framework fabrication,
and a combination of additive and subtractive processes
has been described.14 Among different additive
manufacturing technologies, selective laser melting (SLM)
has become popular in prosthetic dentistry.15 SLM sys-
tems, based on powder-bed technology, fabricate metal
components with adequate accuracy of about 20 mm from
a 3D CAD cast of the framework by using a laser beam to
melt thin layers of Co-Cr metal powder.15,16
The marginal gap of Co-Cr FPD frameworks depends
not only on the accuracy of the fabrication method but
also on subsequent production steps, including ceramic
firing,17,18 which could deform the framework and thus
increase the marginal gap.1,19,20 In addition to a clinically
acceptable marginal gap, adequate bond strength be-
tween the ceramic and the metal framework is neces-
sary.21,22 The marginal gap for metal-ceramic crowns has
been reported to range from 26 to 138 mm depending on
whether these are fabricated by a traditional or digital
workflow.23 The failure rate from veneer chipping has
been reported to range from 2.3% to 8%.24 Information
on the marginal gap of Co-Cr metal-ceramic FPDs pro-
duced by the SLM technology before and after ceramic
firing is limited. A few studies have investigated the effect
of ceramic firing on the marginal gap of Co-Cr
crowns,10,25,26 with most studies using the silicone
replica technique.27,28 The ceramic bond strength29-33 of
Co-Cr frameworks fabricated by different workflows has
also been reported.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to have
different dental technicians investigate the marginal gap
before and after the ceramic firing of Co-Cr alloy
frameworks by SLM. Additionally, ceramic bond strength
was measured by using the Schwickerath crack-initiation
test (3-point bend test), according to ISO 9693-1.34 The
first null hypothesis was that no significant difference
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
- Issue -
would be found between the marginal gap of Co-Cr alloy
frameworks obtained before and after ceramic firing. The
second null hypothesis was that the ceramic bond
strength would not be influenced by the workflow of the
dental technician.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The definitive cast of a 4-unit FPD was scanned by using
a laboratory scanner (Zfx Evolution; Zfx GmbH), and the
digitized data were transferred to a dental CAD software
program (exocad; exocad GmbH) for the design of the
FPDs. Standard tessellation language (STL) files of the
model and FPDs were then sent to a manufacturing
center for review and the fabrication of a Co-Cr master
model (Fig. 1). Eighty Co-Cr frameworks (EOS M270;
EOS GmbH Electro Optical Systems), made of EOS
Cobalt-Chrome SP2 powder and 80 stereolithographic
3D-printed models (EOS Formiga P100; EOS GmbH
Electro Optical Systems) were made from the EOS
polyamide PA 2200 powder (Fig. 2). Eighty plate speci-
mens (25×3×0.5 mm),32,34 conforming to ISO 9693,34
were fabricated by using the same SLM system and
powder (Fig. 3).
The master model, 80 frameworks, and 80 plate
specimens were sent to the laboratories of the Depart-
ment of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engi-
neering for preprocessing assessment. The marginal gap
between the frameworks and the abutment tooth of the
master model was measured by using an optical coor-
dinate-measuring machine (OCMM; OGP SmartScope
Flash CNC 300; Quality Vision International Inc) with a
multiprobing system equipped with a contact mechanical
probe, an optical video probe, and a laser probe. The
measuring system had a maximum allowable error of
E1(z)=2.5+5L/1000 mm, E2(xy)=1.8+5L/1000 mm, and
E3(xyz)=2.8+5L/1000 mm (with L, in millimeters,
equating to the distance measured), according to ISO
10360 standards.35,36
Measurements were made with the framework placed
on the master model and seated with an elastic by
following an automated measuring procedure requiring
no operator intervention. The marginal gap was assessed
from optical video probe grayscale images at ×50
and ×400 magnifications (Fig. 4). For each framework, a
total of 30 marginal gap measurements were made, 5
each on the buccal, mesial, and lingual sides of the canine
and of the molar. Each marginal gap value was obtained
as a red (centroid) area (Fig. 4B) detected by using an
image analysis algorithm (Rhinoceros 5.0 Beta; Robert
McNeel & Associates), and its centroid location was
identified; then, the minimum radial distance from the
centroid location to the perimeter of the area was
calculated, and the marginal gap was defined as twice the
value of the radial distance. The repeatability of the
Di Fiore et al
- 2019
Figure 1. Master cast for marginal gap analysis.
1.1 ±0.1
8 ±0.1
0.5 ±0.05
25 ±1
Figure 3. Specimen configuration for metal-ceramic bond
characterization (mm).
measurement method is shown in Table 1. The Chau-
venet criterion was used to filter the data to avoid mar-
ginal gap measurement errors from excessive local
standard deviation.37
Marginal gap measurements were obtained before
and after ceramic firing, with the influence on framework
deformation being obtained from the difference between
the 2 measurements. For metal-ceramic bond strength
characterization, the specimens were measured by using
digital calipers (ABSOLUTE Digimatic Caliper Series 551;
Mitutoyo Europe GmbH) with a 0.01-mm resolution,
ensuring the specimens conformed to the dimensional
tolerances of the ISO standard 9693 (Fig. 3).34 Eighty sets
(each comprising 1 framework and 1 flat specimen) were
sent to 80 different private, independent dental techni-
cians for ceramic firing together with a letter providing
detailed instructions on the appropriate handling of the
framework and specimens. The sets were collected from
the dental laboratories within 2 weeks (Figs. 5, 6), and
the marginal gaps were measured with the same auto-
mated method used before ceramic firing. The 3-point
bend test (Fig. 7) was used to measure ceramic bond
strength in a universal testing machine (Acumen 3; MTS
Systems Corp) equipped with a 4-column load cell and
Di Fiore et al
3
Figure 2. SLM Co-Cr framework before ceramic firing. SLM, selective
laser melting.
Figure 4. Marginal gap before ceramic firing. A, original
magnification ×50. B, original magnification ×400.
calibrated in the range of ±300 N, applying a crosshead
speed of 1.5 mm/min according to ISO standard 9693.34
The ceramic debond strength (sb ) was calculated ac-
cording to the following formula: sb = FFAIL k, where
FFAIL is the fracture force in N and kk is the correction
coefficient, which depends on the mechanical charac-
teristics and thickness of the specimens. kk was ascer-
tained using the algorithm given in ISO standard 9693.34
The marginal gap (mm) was considered as the statistical
unit. The primary variable was the deformation of the
framework before and after ceramic firing. Descriptive
and comparative statistics were analyzed, and the results
were submitted to the Shapiro-Wilk test, where P=.0002
was considered not normally distributed. The Wilcoxon
matched-pairs signed-rank test (1-tailed) was then used
to compare groups (a=.05). A statistical software program
(SPSS v16.0; SPSS Inc) was used for the analysis.
RESULTS
As only 28 of 80 dental technicians returned the speci-
mens by the deadline and/or in adequate condition, 28
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
4 Volume - Issue -

Table 1. Repeatability of marginal gap (MG) analysis methodology

Side of FPDs Location MG Mean (mm) Standard Deviation (mm)
Buccal 1 23.6 1.4
2 20.2 0.3
3 22 0.9
4 8 1.1
5 7.5 1.1
6 33 0.6
7 41.2 0.8
8 45.7 0.3
9 43.5 0.7
10 42.4 0.4
Mesial 1 26 1.9
2 15.2 6.7
3 31.1 3
4 37.9 0.9
5 37.9 0.9
Palatal 1 43.6 0.8
2 49.1 0.6 Figure 6. SLM Co-Cr specimens after ceramic firing. SLM, selective laser
3 50.1 1 melting.
4 55.8 0.2
5 46.1 0.6
6 17.6 1.4
7 6 0.9
8 11.6 1.6
9 20.6 0.8
10 18.5 1.4
Distal 1 37.6 3
2 48.8 6.9
3 62.9 3.2
4 59.4 2.3
5 43.1 1.3

Figure 7. Three-point bend test apparatus with SLM Co-Cr specimen

after failure. SLM, selective laser melting.

Figure 5. SLM Co-Cr framework after ceramic firing. SLM, selective laser
melting.
frameworks and specimens were analyzed after ceramic
firing. The mean ±standard deviation (SD) marginal gap
of the framework was 25 ±9 mm, maximum=53 mm and
minimum=13 mm, before ceramic firing, and 34 ±12 mm,
maximum=63 mm and minimum=20 mm, after firing. The
difference in the marginal gap between before and after
ceramic firing was 9 ±8.6 mm. The Wilcoxon rank-sum
test showed that this difference was statistically signifi-
cant (P<.001). The mean ±SD of the 3-point bend test
was 33 ±9 MPa, maximum=50 MPa and minimum=14
MPa. Eighteen specimens did not meet ISO 9693 stan-
dard requirements for sb >25 MPa.34
DISCUSSION
The present study examined the influence of ceramic
firing on the marginal gap of 28 FPDs and the ceramic
bond strength of 28 specimens of cobalt-chromium alloy
specimens fabricated by SLM. Significant differences
emerged between the marginal gap values obtained
before and after ceramic firing, so the first null hypothesis
was rejected. The second null hypothesis was also re-
jected because not all plate specimens met ISO 9693
standard requirements for sb >25 MPa.34 All the marginal
gap values were still clinically acceptable, however. The
maximum clinically acceptable marginal gap has been
reported to be 120 mm,4-6 but a marginal gap of around
50 to 80 mm is recommended to avoid mechanical and
biological complications.
Few studies have examined the marginal gap before
and after ceramic firing of FPDs produced using
SLM.6,10,25 Zeng et al25 analyzed the marginal gap of
dental Co-Cr alloy copings fabricated by SLM after
repeated firing and reported values of 36 mm, 37 mm, 38
mm, and 38 mm after the first, third, fifth, and seventh
firings. The authors concluded that repeated firing had

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY Di Fiore et al

- 2019
no significant influence on the marginal gap but failed to
mention any measurements obtained before ceramic
firing. Results consistent with the present study were
reported by Kaleli and Sarac10: the marginal gap
increased after porcelain application (from 49 mm before
firing to 59 mm), but the gap was still clinically acceptable.
The authors also reported that the marginal gap was
narrower for coping fabricated by laser sintering than for
coping prepared by milling or the conventional lost-wax
method. However, Kocaa g lu et al6 concluded that
g ao
applying the veneering ceramic influenced the marginal
gap of coping prepared by SLM (from 72.7 mm before to
94.7 mm after firing).
Katosoulis et al26 examined the fit of complete-arch
FPDs fabricated by milling before and after veneering,
with findings similar to those of the present study,
although different technologies were used in the 2 studies.
The ceramic firing had no effect on the fit, and all the
values of marginal gaps were clinically acceptable. The
median vertical gap was of 19 mm for unveneered and 20
mm for veneered FPDs. The present data identified a 9-mm
mean difference in marginal gaps obtained before and
after ceramic firing and narrower marginal gaps compared
with other studies.10,25 This difference may be attributable
to the methods used to measure the marginal gap. Most
authors used a scanning electron microscope (SEM)10,25,27
or the silicone replica technique6,28; 1 study used micro-
computed tomography,27 and OCMM was only used in
the present study. OCMM ensures a maximum error about
10 times lower than that of the optical microscope
(5 mm).11,14,35,36 One of the main advantages of using
OCMM, moreover, is that, unlike the SEM or silicone
replica method, it allows the marginal gap to be measured
without operator error.
To achieve high clinical survival rates of metal-
ceramic FPDs and clinically acceptable marginal gaps, it is
essential to ensure an excellent bond between the
ceramic and the substructure. The mean ceramic bond
strength of the specimens in the present study was 33 ±9
MPa, but not all specimens satisfied the ISO 9693 stan-
dard requirement of sb >25 MPa.34 Six of 28 dental
technicians were unable to return the frameworks with
ceramic applied.
The bond strength of ceramic to Co-Cr dental alloy
obtained with SLM has been reported to be 33 ±3 MPa
by Li et al,29 46.8 ±5.1 MPa by Wang et al,30 and 55 ±3
MPa by Wu et al.31 These authors all concluded that the
ceramic bond strength did not depend on the
manufacturing method.29-33 The mean bond strength in
the present study was lower probably because the
ceramic firing workflow was not standardized (the
specimens were sent to different dental technicians to
simulate actual clinical conditions).
Limitations of this study include the use of only one
technology to produce the frameworks. The subsequent
Di Fiore et al
5
nonstandardized ceramic firing revealed the different
workflow of the dental technicians, and the forces
applied in the 3-point bending test were not represen-
tative of clinical conditions. However, distortion of the
marginal gap can be caused by many factors other than
ceramic firing, such as alloy type and margin design.1,19,20
Overall, using the OCMM could be a more standardized
procedure. All SLM Co-Cr frameworks showed clinically
acceptable marginal gaps. Although the gaps increased
after ceramic firing, they still did not cause clinically
relevant distortions. In vivo studies are needed to assess
the performance of frameworks fabricated by the SLM
technology.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of this in vitro study, the following
conclusions were drawn:
1. Ceramic firing affected the marginal gap and the
metal-ceramic bond strength.
2. All Co-Cr frameworks had a marginal gap narrower
than 120 mm, which is considered the clinically
acceptable limit.
3. Only 23 of 28 specimens had a metal-ceramic bond
strength value higher than the 25 MPa specified by
ISO 9693, as 5 of 28 dental technicians were unable
to follow the ceramic firing instructions.
REFERENCES
1. Joias RM, Tango RN, Junho de Araujo JE, Junho de Araujo MA, Ferreira
Anzaloni Saavedra Gde S, Paes-Junior TJ, et al. Shear bond strength of a
ceramic to Co-Cr alloys. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:54-9.
2. Bader JD, Rozier RG, McFall WT, Ramsey DL. Effect of crown margins on
periodontal conditions in regularly attending patients. J Prosthet Dent
1991;65:75-9.
3. Felton DA, Kanoy BE, Bayne SC, Wirthman GP. Effect of in vivo crown
margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:357-64.
4. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by
an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 1971;131:107-11.
5. Örtorp A, Jönssön D, Mohsen A, Von Steyern PV. The fit of cobalt-chromium
three unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a
comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2011;27:356-63.
6. Kocaagaoglu H, Kılınç HI, Albayrak H, Kara M. In vitro evaluation of mar-
ginal, axial, and occlusal discrepancies in metal ceramic restorations produced
with new technologies. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:368-74.
7. Nicolaisen MH, Bahrami G, Finlay S, Isidor F. Comparison of fatigue resis-
tance and failure modes between metal-ceramic and all-ceramic crowns by
cyclic loading in water. J Dent 2014;42:1613-20.
8. Lee DH, Lee BJ, Kim SH, Lee KB. Shear bond strength of porcelain to a new
millable alloy and a conventional castable alloy. J Prosthet Dent 2015;113:
329-35.
9. Willer J, Rossbach A, Weber HP. Computer-assisted milling of dental res-
torations using a new CAD/CAM data acquisition system. J Prosthet Dent
1998;80:346-53.
10. Kaleli N, Saraç D. Influence of porcelain firing and cementation on the
marginal adaptation of metal-ceramic restorations prepared by different
methods. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:656-61.
11. Paniz G, Stellini E, Meneghello R, Cerardi A, Gobbato EA, Bressan E. The
precision of fit of cast and milled full-arch implant-supported restorations. Int
J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:687-93.
12. Park JK, Kim HY, Kim WC, Kim JH. Evaluation of the fit of metal ceramic
restorations fabricated with a pre-sintered soft alloy. J Prosthet Dent
2016;116:916-23.
13. Tamac E, Toksavul S, Toman M. Clinical marginal and internal adaptation of
CAD/CAM milling, laser sintering, and cast metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet
Dent 2014;112:909-13.
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
6 Volume
14. Ciocca L, Meneghello R, Monaco C, Savio G, Scheda L, Gatto MR, et al.
In vitro assessment of the accuracy of digital impressions prepared using a
single system for full-arch restorations on implants. Int J Comput Assist
Radiol Surg 2018;13:1097-108.
15. Azari A, Nikzad S. The evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review.
Rapid Prototyping J 2009;15:216-25.
16. Koutsoukis T, Zinelis S, Eliades G, Alwazzan K, Rifaiy MA, Al Jabbari YS.
Selective laser melting technique of Co-Cr dental alloys: a review of structure
and properties and comparative analysis with other available techniques.
J Prosthodont 2015;24:303-12.
17. Gemalmaz D, Alkumru HN. Marginal fit changes during porcelain cycles.
J Prosthet Dent 1995;73:49-54.
18. Shiratsuchi H, Komine F, Kakehashi Y, Matsumura H. Influence of finish line
design on marginal adaptation of electroformed metal-ceramic crowns.
J Prosthet Dent 2006;95:237-42.
19. Cho SH, Nagy WW, Goodman JT, Solomon E, Koike M. The effect of mul-
tiple firings on the marginal integrity of pressable ceramic single crowns.
J Prosthet Dent 2012;107:17-23.
20. Fonseca JC, Henriques GEP, Sobrinho LC, De Goes MF. Stress-relieving and
porcelain firing cycle influence on marginal fit of commercially pure titanium
and titanium-aluminum-vanadium copings. Dent Mater 2003;19:686-91.
21. Stannard JG, Marks L, Kanchanatawewat K. Effect of multiple firing on the
bond strength of selected matched porcelain-fused-to-metal combinations.
J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:627-9.
22. Ozcan M. Fracture reasons in ceramic-fused-to-metal restorations. J Oral
Rehabil 2003;30:265-9.
23. 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.
24. Libby G, Arcuri MR, LaVelle WE, Hebl L. Longevity of fixed partial dentures.
J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:127-31.
25. Zeng L, Zhang Y, Liu Z, Wei B. Effects of repeated firing on the marginal
accuracy of Co-Cr copings fabricated by selective laser melting. J Prosthet
Dent 2015;113:135-9.
26. Katsoulis J, Mericske-Stern R, Enkling N, Katsoulis K, Blatz MB. In vitro
precision of fit of computer-aided designed and computer-aided manufac-
tured titanium screw-retained fixed dental prostheses before and after
ceramic veneering. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:44-9.
27. Kim EH, Lee DH, Kwon SM, Kwon TY. A microcomputed tomography
evaluation of the marginal fit of cobalt-chromium alloy copings fabricated by
new manufacturing techniques and alloy systems. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:
393-9.
28. Huang Z, Zhang L, Zhu J, Zhang X. Clinical marginal and internal fit of metal
ceramic crowns fabricated with a selective laser melting technology.
J Prosthet Dent 2015;113:623-7.
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
- Issue -
29. Li J, Chen C, Liao J, Liu L, Ye X, Lin S, et al. Bond strengths of porcelain to
cobalt-chromium alloys made by casting, milling, and selective laser melting.
J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:69-75.
30. Wang H, Feng Q, Li N, Xu S. Evaluation of metal-ceramic bond character-
istics of three dental Co-Cr alloys prepared with different fabrication tech-
niques. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:916-23.
31. Wu L, Zhu H, Gai X, Wang Y. Evaluation of the mechanical properties and
porcelain bond strength of cobalt-chromium dental alloy fabricated by se-
lective laser melting. J Prosthet Dent 2014;111:51-5.
32. Kaleli N, Saraç D. Comparison of porcelain bond strength of different metal
frameworks prepared by using conventional and recently introduced fabri-
cation methods. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:76-82.
33. Ren XW, Zeng L, Wei ZM, Xin XZ, Wei B. Effects of multiple firings on metal-
ceramic bond strength of Co-Cr alloy fabricated by selective laser melting.
J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:109-14.
34. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9693-1. Dentistry
compability testing. Part 1: Metal-ceramic systems. Geneva: International
Organization for Standardization; 2012. ISO Store Order: OP-184149 (Date:
2017-06-09). Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html.
35. Di Fiore A, Meneghello R, Savio G, Sivolella S, Katsoulis J, Stellini E.
In vitro implant impression accuracy using a new photopolymerizing
SDR splinting material. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17(Suppl 2):
721-9.
36. Savio G, Meneghello R, Concheri G. Optical properties of spectacle
lenses computed by surfaces differential quantities. Adv Sci Lett 2013;19:
595-600.
37. Thompson WR. On a criterion for the rejection of observations and the
distribution of the ratio of deviation to sample standard deviation. Ann Math
Stat 1935;6:214-9.
Corresponding author:
Dr Adolfo Di Fiore
Department of Neurosciences
Dental School
University of Padova, via Giustiniani 2
35100, Padova
ITALY
Email: adolfo.difiore@unipd.it
Acknowledgments
The authors thank 3D Fast for technical support.
Copyright © 2019 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.08.001
Di Fiore et al