Objectives
To evaluate three‐dimensional external gap progression after chewing simulation of high translucency zirconia (HTZ) and zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) applied on endodontically treated teeth with different preparation designs.
Materials and Method
Endodontically treated molars were prepared with low‐retentive (adhesive overlay) and high‐retentive (full crown) designs above cementum‐enamel junction and restored with HTZ and ZLS. Micro‐computed tomography analysis was assessed before and after chewing simulation to evaluate three‐dimensionally the external gap progression. Results were statistically analyzed with two‐way ANOVA and post‐hoc Tukey test.
Results
High‐retentive preparation design had a significantly inferior gap progression compared to the overlay preparation (p < 0.01); ZLS exhibited a significant inferior gap progression compared to HTZ (p < 0.01).
Conclusions
High‐retentive preparations restored with ZLS seem to better perform in maintaining the sealing of the external margin after cyclic fatigue.
Clinical significance
The clinician should pay attention to the proper combination of preparation designs and ceramic material selection for an endodontically treated molar restoration. HTZ seems to perform worse than lithium silicate in terms of marginal sealing, still showing lacks in resistance to cyclic fatigue when adhesive preparations are performed.
Objective. The purpose of this ex vivo study was to compare the trueness of traditional and digital workflows and to analyze the interfacial fit of CAD/CAM restorations on gypsum and 3D-printed casts (3DC). Methods: Forty patients underwent indirect posterior adhesive restorations. After tooth preparation, both traditional and chairside procedures were followed. Obtained models were scanned to generate STL files of the intraoral impression (IOS), the conventional cast (RS), and the 3D-printed cast (3DCS). Superimposition of the casts was performed to evaluate trueness. Then, for each preparation, two identical CAD/CAM restorations were milled and luted on RS and 3DC. Micro-CT scan was performed to evaluate 3D interfacial fit. Results. Surface trueness analysis showed no significant differences among groups (p > 0.05), with average trueness ranging from 11.56 to 17.01 µm. Micro-CT analysis showed significant differences between gypsum casts (average ranging from 135.78 to 212.31 µm) and 3DC (average ranging from 57.63 to 144.55 µm) for both marginal and internal fit. Conclusions. In adhesive restorations manufacturing, digital and conventional procedures generate casts that are not significantly different. Marginal fit of adhesive restorations is similar to conventional crown design and clinically acceptable. It is assumable that a direct digital workflow could benefit from the usage of 3DC.
Background: To evaluate different adhesive luting procedures on coronal dentin bond-strength of Cerasmart CAD-CAM blocks with μTBS test. Methods: 36 molar crowns were flattened in order to expose sound dentin and a standardized smear layer was created with 600 grit paper. Specimens were divided into six groups according to the luting cement employed (n = 12 each): G1: Panavia V5 (Kuraray, Japan); G2: Bifix QM (Voco, Germany); G3: Estecem (Tokuyama, Japan). CAD-CAM blocks (Cerasmart, GC), shade A2LT, size 14, were sectioned with a diamond saw to obtain 4 mm high specimens, which were then luted on the coronal dentin, following the manufacturer instructions. Specimens were serially sectioned to obtain 1 mm thick beams in accordance with the μTBS test technique. Half of the beams were stressed to failure after 24 h (t = 0), while the other half were stored in artificial saliva for 12 months, at 37 °C, for ageing before stressing to failure (t = 12). Results: two-way ANOVA test showed significant difference for the factor “luting cement” (p = 0.0002), while the factor “time of storage” (p = 0.0991) had no significant effect on µTBS. Conclusions: PanaviaV5 seems to have better µTBS values at T0 than QM and ES and 1 year aging doesn’t seem to affect the bonding strength of tested systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.