Abstract

This paper assesses the effect of cement type and cement preheating on the marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate single crown. Methods: 40 maxillary premolars were selected, restored with lithium disilicate single crowns. Teeth were randomly assigned into four groups (n = 10) based on cement type (Panavia SA or LinkForce) and preheating temperature (25 °C or 54 °C). After fabrication of the restoration, cements were incubated at 25 °C or 54 °C for 24 h, and each crown was cemented to its corresponding tooth. After 24 h, all specimens were thermally aged to (10,000 thermal cycles between 5 °C and 55 °C), then load cycled for 240,000 cycles. Each specimen was then sectioned in bucco-palatal direction and inspected under a stereomicroscope at x45 magnification for marginal and internal fit evaluation. The data were statistically analyzed (significance at p ≤ 0.05 level). Results: At the mid-buccal finish line, mid-buccal wall, palatal cusp, mid-palatal wall, mid-palatal finish line, and palatal margin measuring points, there was a significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between the lithium disilicate group cemented with Panavia SA at 25 °C and the group cemented with LinkForce at 25 °C, while there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) at the other points. At all measuring points, except at the palatal cusp tip (p = 0.948) and palatal margin (p = 0.103), there was a statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between the lithium disilicate group cemented with Panavia SA at 54 °C and the group cemented with LinkForce at 54 °C. Regardless of cement preheating, statistically significant differences were found in the buccal cusp tip, central groove, palatal cusp tip, and mid-palatal wall (p ≤ 0.05) in the lithium disilicate group cemented with Panavia SA at 25 °C and 54 °C, as well as the mid-palatal chamfer finish line and palatal margin in the LinkForce group cemented with Panavia SA at 25 °C and 54 °C. At the other measurement points, however, there was no significant difference (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The type of resin cement affects the internal and marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns. At most measuring points, the cement preheating does not improve the internal and marginal fit of all lithium disilicate crowns.

Highlights

  • Ceramic restorations are frequently used in daily dental practice because of their superior esthetic characteristics, good mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and long-term stability [1]

  • There difference between lithium disilicate crowns ce- ce◦ C and that preheated at 54 ◦ C at the buccal margin mented with cement at mented with Panavia SA cement at 25 °C and that preheated at 54 °C at the buccal margin

  • There was a significant difference between lithium disilicate groups cemented with LinkForce cement at 25 ◦ C

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ceramic restorations are frequently used in daily dental practice because of their superior esthetic characteristics, good mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and long-term stability [1]. For proper selection of ceramic restoration, the choice has been increasingly oriented toward lithium disilicate [2]. Lithium disilicate is classified as a glass-ceramic, in the class of particle-filled glass materials [3]. Heat-pressing or CAD/CAM processing methods are used to make lithium disilicate restorations. The mechanical characteristics of these restorations are influenced by the block composition and the production procedure [4,5]. Because of its superior esthetics, adhesive characteristics, ability to preserve tooth structure, and good fracture resistance, lithium disilicate materials have been widely promoted [6,7,8]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call