The mechanical behavior of ceramic materials varies with the variation of their structure and mechanical properties. Accordingly, further investigation is always needed to explore the biomechanical behavior of recent materials when used as endocrowns before clinical trials.

For the restoration of endodontically treated teeth, adding a short axial wall and shoulder finish line can increase the fracture resistance. However, further investigations, especially the fatigue behavior, are needed to ensure this effect applies with small increases of restoration thickness.

No abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of different wax pattern fabrication techniques on the fit of customized pressed lithium disilicate implant abutments on titanium inserts before and after pressing. The marginal fit results of pressed lithium disilicate implant abutments were then compared with those of milled lithium disilicate abutments. Materials and Methods: After scanning the titanium inserts and designing an implant abutment, wax patterns were fabricated with three techniques (n = 15 each): computeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) milling, 3D printing and conventional layering. The marginal fit (µm) was measured using a stereomicroscope for all the wax patterns before pressing them into the lithium disilicate abutments. The pressed implant abutments were measured again for marginal fit, and the results were compared to those of the milled lithium disilicate abutments. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess different wax pattern fabrication techniques in each stage before and after pressing. One-way ANOVA was also used to compare the groups of pressed and milled lithium disilicate abutments. Multiple pairwise comparisons were performed using the Tukey post hoc test in each stage. Results: There were statistically significant differences between the marginal fit of the three wax patterns groups (p < 0.001; f = 123.33), wherein the mean marginal fit was the highest for conventionally layered wax patterns (30 ± 13.09) µm. Furthermore, after pressing, there were statistically significant differences between the marginal fit of the three pressed abutments groups (p < 0.001; f = 518.62), wherein the mean marginal fit was the highest for pressed e.max abutments fabricated from conventionally layered wax patterns (25.26 ± 3.9) µm. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean marginal fit of the pressed abutments fabricated from conventional layered wax patterns and that of the milled CAD/CAM abutments. However, the mean marginal fit of the milled CAD/CAM abutments was higher than that of the pressed abutments fabricated from both CAD/CAM wax and 3D printed wax. Conclusion: All the tested fabrication methods provided degrees of accuracy that lie well within accepted limits. The use of pressed lithium disilicate abutments fabricated from conventional layering wax pattern technique should provide a more consistent better marginal fit between the titanium insert and the abutment and may therefore be the preferable fabrication method.

No abstract