Comparation of marginal and internal adaption of endocrowns made from three different ceramics in vitro
Bai-jin ZENG,Lin-jiao HE,Jian-min HAN,Yuan LI,Hong LIN,Hong GAO,Qing-song JIANG
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-3761.2017.06.006
2017-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To compare marginal and internal adaption of prostheses manufactured from three different ceramics with a chairside CAM/CAM system and provide experimental evidence for their clinical application.Methods:A basic preparation of endocrown was made of cobalt-chromium alloy and 36 impressions were taken and poured with die-stone.36 models were randomly divided into 3 groups (n=1 2).The models were scanned and the protheses were fabricated with Cerec AC.The protheses were cemented to the models with resin cement and embedded with self-cure resin,and then cut with a cutting machine.The thickness of adhesive between prothesis and the die were measured with Smartscrope MVP 2000.Results:The thickness of adhesives at marginal sites of all three ceramics was smaller than 120μm,and that of internal measuring sites was all smaller than 200μm.At the marginal,axial-occlusal corner and axial-pulpal corner sites,the thickness of adhesive of Celtra(R) Duo (84.69± 8.90μm,129.89± 17.86μm,166.63 ± 21.71 μm) was smaller than Cerec block (107.36± 8.98μm,161.13± 19.35μm,198.86± 11.56μm) and IPS e.max CAD (110.85±4.58μm,183.81±22.00μm,195.81± 13.25μm) respectively,and there was a significant difference between them (P<0.05),however,the difference between Cerec block and IPS e.max CAD was not significant.At all the other measuring sites,there were no statistical differences among Celtra(R) Duo,Cerec block and IPS e.max CAD.Conclusions:All these three ceramics could meet the clinical requirements.Celtra(R) Duo shows better than IPS e.max CAD and Cerec block in marginal and internal adaption of endocrowns fabricated by a chairside CAM/CAM system.