PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide crowns in preparations with two different finish line configurations before and after porcelain firing cycles, after a glaze cycle, and after cementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Twenty human molar teeth were prepared to receive full crowns; ten were prepared with a 90° round shoulder and another ten with a 45° chamfer finish line. Zirconium dioxide copings were fabricated using CAD/CAM technology (Lava™ system). They were then veneered with a low-fusing glass-ceramic (IPS e.max® Ceram). Finally, they were glazed and cemented with a resin-composite cement (RelyX™ Unicem, Aplicap™). Measurements for marginal adaptation using stereomicroscopy (40×) were performed at four stages: copings (S1), after porcelain firing cycles (S2), after glazing (S3), and after cementation (S4). One-way ANOVA was used to assess the influence of the finish line design on the marginal adaptation in each stage. Two-way ANOVA with repeated measurements was performed to assess the influence on the marginal adaptation of the porcelain firing cycles, glaze firing cycle, and cementation. RESULTS: The measured marginal gap mean values for the shoulder group (μm) were: 50.13 (S1), 54.32 (S2), 55.12 (S3), and 59.83 (S4). The values for the chamfer group were: 63.56 (S1), 71.85 (S2), 74.12 (S3), and 76.97 (S4). When comparing marginal gaps between specimens with two different finish lines, differences were noticed at the four studied stages (p = 0.0165, p = 0.0027, p = 0.0009, and p = 0.0009, respectively). No differences were manifested in the marginal gap measurements of the shoulder group at the different stages of fabrication (p = 0.4335); however, in the chamfer group, differences were noticed between S1 and S3 (p = 0.0042). CONCLUSIONS:Marginal adaptation was influenced by the finish line design. The firing cycles significantly affected the chamfer group; nevertheless, the marginal gap was within the range of clinical acceptability.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide crowns in preparations with two different finish line configurations before and after porcelain firing cycles, after a glaze cycle, and after cementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty human molar teeth were prepared to receive full crowns; ten were prepared with a 90° round shoulder and another ten with a 45° chamfer finish line. Zirconium dioxide copings were fabricated using CAD/CAM technology (Lava™ system). They were then veneered with a low-fusing glass-ceramic (IPS e.max® Ceram). Finally, they were glazed and cemented with a resin-composite cement (RelyX™ Unicem, Aplicap™). Measurements for marginal adaptation using stereomicroscopy (40×) were performed at four stages: copings (S1), after porcelain firing cycles (S2), after glazing (S3), and after cementation (S4). One-way ANOVA was used to assess the influence of the finish line design on the marginal adaptation in each stage. Two-way ANOVA with repeated measurements was performed to assess the influence on the marginal adaptation of the porcelain firing cycles, glaze firing cycle, and cementation. RESULTS: The measured marginal gap mean values for the shoulder group (μm) were: 50.13 (S1), 54.32 (S2), 55.12 (S3), and 59.83 (S4). The values for the chamfer group were: 63.56 (S1), 71.85 (S2), 74.12 (S3), and 76.97 (S4). When comparing marginal gaps between specimens with two different finish lines, differences were noticed at the four studied stages (p = 0.0165, p = 0.0027, p = 0.0009, and p = 0.0009, respectively). No differences were manifested in the marginal gap measurements of the shoulder group at the different stages of fabrication (p = 0.4335); however, in the chamfer group, differences were noticed between S1 and S3 (p = 0.0042). CONCLUSIONS: Marginal adaptation was influenced by the finish line design. The firing cycles significantly affected the chamfer group; nevertheless, the marginal gap was within the range of clinical acceptability.
Authors: Luigi Giovanni Bernardo Sichi; Fernanda Zapater Pierre; Laura Viviana Calvache Arcila; Guilherme Schmitt de Andrade; João Paulo Mendes Tribst; Pietro Ausiello; Alessandro Espedito di Lauro; Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges Journal: Molecules Date: 2021-10-10 Impact factor: 4.411
Authors: Karl Martin Lehmann; Michael Weyhrauch; Monika Bjelopavlovic; Herbert Scheller; Henning Staedt; Peter Ottl; Peer W Kaemmerer; Stefan Wentaschek Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 3.623