• Corpus ID: 209505644

Marginal and internal gaps of crown and bridge substructure of two all-ceramic systems

@inproceedings{Jirajariyavej2017MarginalAI,
  title={Marginal and internal gaps of crown and bridge substructure of two all-ceramic systems},
  author={Bundhit Jirajariyavej and Daungjan Siangsiaw and Chuchai Anunmana},
  year={2017}
}

• Bundhit Jirajariyavej, Daungjan Siangsiaw, Chuchai Anunmana
• Published 2017
• Medicine, Materials Science

Objective: The objectives of this study were to compare the marginal and internal gaps of two ceramic systems as well as the marginal and internal gaps between single crowns and three-unit fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) substructures. Materials and Methods: Ceramic substructures were fabricated using CAD/CAM (LavaTM Zirconia) and heatpress technique (IPS e.max® Press) as premolar and molar single crowns and three-unit FDPs (4 groups, n=10). Marginal and internal gap widths were determined and measured using silicone replica technique. Results were analyzed using Mann Whitney U-test (α= 0.05), and data were described as median and interquartile range. Results: For IPS e.max® Press, there was no significant difference of marginal adaptation between the crown and bridge groups, except at the mesial marginal gap of premolar (Crown; 39 μm, Bridge; 106 μm). For LavaTM Zirconia, differences were found at several locations of the premolar and one point of the molar. Significant differences of marginal gap between IPS e.max® Press and LavaTM Zirconia crown substructures were found only in premolar. There were also significant differences of marginal fit of FDPs between two systems in both abutments. Significant differences of internal fit were mostly found in the axial wall and the cusp tip areas. Conclusions: Most marginal and internal gaps of IPS emax® Press were greater than those of LavaTM Zirconia except at the occlusal locations. In addition, three-unit FDPs revealed larger gap widths than those of single crowns in both ceramic groups.