Effect of different impression methods and ceramic materials on adaptation of inlays

Abstract

<p><strong>Objective:</strong> The aim of this study was to evaluate the internal and marginal adaptation of inlays fabricated from different types of impressions (conventional and digital) and different ceramics (feldspathic and lithium disilicate). <strong>Material and Methods:</strong> Forty premolars were prepared for all-ceramic inlay restoration and assigned to 4 groups (n=10), according to the impression method (conventional with addition silicone and digital impressions) and ceramic type (lithium disilicate and feldspathic ceramic blocks). For each type of impression, 10 inlays were fabricated from lithium disilicate blocks and the other 10 from feldspathic ceramic blocks, by means of the CAD-CAM system. The internal adaptation was analyzed by replica. The marginal fit was analyzed under a stereomicroscope by directly measuring the gap formed between the inlay and the tooth in the proximal and occlusal regions. <strong>Results:</strong> The marginal or internal adaptations were not affected by type of impression (conventional = digital impression), irrespective of the ceramic type. Only the internal adaptation was affected by material, i.e., feldspathic ceramic had lower values than disilicate ceramic, when considering the digital impression. <strong>Conclusion:</strong> The conventional and digital impressions promote similar marginal and internal adaptation of tested feldspathic and disilicate ceramic inlays. For digital impression the feldspathic ceramic showed better internal adaptation than lithium disilicate. </p><p><strong>Keywords</strong></p><p>Ceramics; Dental internal adaptation; Dental marginal adaptation; Dental impression technique.</p>

The Effect of Immediate Dentin Sealing on the Marginal Adaptation of LithiumDisilicate Overlay Restorations using different types of luting agents

“…Sirona InLab CAD (20.0 software) and InLab MC XL milling unit were used to design and create the overlay restorations [19]. The overlay restorations fabricated from lithium disilicate blocks (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein) were milled out using extra-fine milling mode [20]. Subsequently, the glazing paste (IPS e.max CAD paste; Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein) was fired on overlay, using the Programat P500 furnace (Ivoclar, Germany) at 840°C, for 20 min.…”

Marginal gap of zirconia and lithium disilicate frameworks produced by the CAD-CAM technique through a comparator microscope in vitro analysis

“…Zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations seem to offer excellent marginal adaptation with reduced microgaps, thereby maintaining the health of periodontal structures and ensuring longterm clinical success [25][26][27]. To achieve this, obtaining the definitive mold, either physically or digitally, through conventional molding or digitalization is necessary to provide information for adequate marginal adaptation [28][29][30][31][32][33]. While both materials are classified as dental ceramics, there are differences between them, such as resistance, translucency, aesthetics, and hardness.…”