The purpose of this review is to present a comprehensive review of the current published literature investigating the various methods and techniques for scanning, designing, and fabrication of CAD/CAM generated restorations along with detailing the new classifications of CAD/CAM technology. I performed a review of a PubMed using the following search terms "CAD/CAM, 3D printing, scanner, digital impression, and zirconia". The articles were screened for further relevant investigations. The search was limited to articles written in English, published from 2001 to 2015. In addition, a manual search was also conducted through articles and reference lists retrieved from the electronic search and peer-reviewed journals. CAD/CAM technology has advantages including digital impressions and models, and use of virtual articulators. However, the implementation of this technology is still considered expensive and requires highly trained personnel. Currently, the design software has more applications including complete dentures and removable partial denture frameworks. The accuracy of restoration fabrication can be best attained with 5 axes milling units. The 3D printing technology has been incorporated into dentistry, but does not include ceramics and is limited to polymers. In the future, optical impressions will be replaced with ultrasound impressions using ultrasonic waves, which have the capability to penetrate the gingiva non-invasively without retraction cords and not be affected by fluids. The coming trend for most practitioners will be the use of an acquisition camera attached to a computer with the appropriate software and the capability of forwarding the image to the laboratory.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the optical properties of zirconia and glass-ceramic (e.max) were affected by low-temperature degradation (aging). Experiment samples were fabricated with seven zirconia brands (n=10): Zenostar, Zirlux, Katana, Bruxzir, DD-BioZX2, DD-cubeX2, NexxZr; and e.max were used as a control. This resulted in a total of 80 samples in the experiment. The L*, a* and b* were measured for each sample, and then the optical properties including translucency parameter (TP), contrast ratio (CR), and opalescence parameter (OP) were calculated. The samples were aged (20, 40, 60, 80, 100h), and the optical properties were calculated after each interval. Most zirconia brands had lower L*, higher a*, higher b* with increased aging, which visually corresponds to darker, redder, and more yellow. Aging also increased CR, lowered TP, and lowered OP. e.max was also affected by aging but still had the highest TP (23.9±2.8), L* (81.7±3.4), and lowest CR (0.41±0.05) compared to any zirconia. The Zenostar had the closest TP (24.1±0.4), and L* (90.2±0.5) values to e.max before aging. However, after 100h of aging, the DD-cubeX2 was least effected and had the highest TP (22.2±0.6) and lowest CR (0.43±0.01) compared with other zirconia samples and highest OP (11.3±0.2) of all ceramic samples. The optical properties of zirconia and e.max materials were affected by aging with the effects increasing with time. The magnitude of change was affected by seven brands of dental zirconia.

Purpose: To perform qualitative analysis using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of fracture surfaces for ceramic and polymeric dental materials broken via standardized flexural and crunch‐the‐crown (CTC) tests.Materials and Methods: Zirconia, glass–ceramic, and polymeric (Trilor; TRI, Juvora; JUV, Pekkton; PEK) materials were loaded using crowns for CTC tests, discs (zirconia and glass–ceramics) for piston‐on‐3 ball tests, bars (polymer) for 3‐point bend tests, and bars (zirconia, glass–ceramics) for 4‐point bend tests. SEM was used to characterize the fracture surfaces and identify fracture surface features (e.g., origin, mist, hackle, and the direction of crack propagation [DCP]). Electron dispersive spectroscopy was used to identify the local chemistry.Results: Fracture surface features were found to be less visually apparent for glass–ceramics than zirconia. For zirconia bars, fractures originated roughly midway between the corner and center for processing defects related to sintering. Fractures originated at the bottom corners of glass–ceramic bars (void or surface flaw) and PEK bars (surface flaw). TRI bar failures exposed glassy fibers. Fracture features were generally less discernable for discs compared to bars for zirconia and glass–ceramics. Ceramic crowns fractured into 2 to 3 pieces, with fractures originating at the occlusal surface and clear evidence for the DCP. Failures of TRI and JUV specimens (bars and crowns) were less catastrophic than for the ceramics, with exposed fibers (TRI) and surface cracks (JUV). PEK crown and bar fractures presented dimple (ductile) features formed due to microvoid coalescence followed by brittle crack propagation.Conclusions: The critical flaws responsible for failure initiation were a function of material composition and test configuration. Fractographic analysis can reveal problems associated with the manufacturing of materials, their handling, grinding and finishing/polishing procedures, the structural design and choice of material, and the quality of the final laboratory‐delivered restoration.

There is a vast amount of published literature concerning dental veneers; however, the effects of tooth preparation, aging, veneer type, and resin cement type on the failure of dental veneers in laboratory versus clinical scenarios are not clear. The purpose of the present narrative review was to determine the principal factors associated with failures of dental veneers in laboratory tests and to understand how these factors translate into clinical successes/failures. Articles were identified and screened by the lead author in January 2024 using the keywords ‘‘dental veneer”, “complication”, “survival rate”, “failure”, and “success rate” using PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Science Direct. The inclusion criteria included articles published between January 1999 and January 2024 on the topics of preparation of a tooth, aging processes of the resin cement and veneer, translucency, thickness, fabrication technique of the veneer; shade, and thickness of the resin cement. The exclusion criteria included articles that discussed marginal and internal fit, microhardness, water sorption, solubility, polishability, occlusal veneers, retention, surface treatments, and wear. The results of the present review indicated that dental veneers generally have a high survival rate (>90% for more than 10 years). The amount of preserved enamel layer plays a paramount role in the survival and success rates of veneers, and glass-ceramic veneers with minimal/no preparation showed the highest survival rates. Fracture was the primary failure mechanism associated with decreased survival rate, followed by debonding and color change. Fractures increased in the presence of parafunctional activities. Fewer endodontic complications were associated with veneer restorations. No difference was observed between the maxillary and mandibular teeth. Clinical significance: Fractures can be reduced by evaluation of occlusion immediately after cementation and through the use of high-strength veneer materials, resin cements with low moduli, and thin layers of highly polished veneers. Debonding failures can be reduced with minimal/no preparation, and immediate dentin sealing should be considered when dentin is exposed. Debonding can also be reduced by preventing contamination from blood, saliva, handpiece oil, or fluoride-containing polishing paste; through proper surface treatment (20 s of hydrofluoric acid etching for glass ceramic followed by silane for 60 s); and through use of light-cured polymerization for thin veneers. Long-term color stability may be maintained using resin cements with UDMA-based resin, glass ceramic materials, and light-cure polymerization with thin veneers.