Volume 30, Issue 4 (1-2018)
jdm 2018, 30(4): 208-213 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Esfahanizadeh G, Aghel M, Asl S M, Bayat E. Comparison of the marginal fit of different types of dental ceramic systems (In-vitro). jdm 2018; 30 (4) :208-213
URL: http://jdm.tums.ac.ir/article-1-5704-en.html
URL: http://jdm.tums.ac.ir/article-1-5704-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthetic, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Faculty Member of Prosthetic Department, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Student Research Committee, Islamic Azad University, Tehran branch, Tehran, Iran
4- Dentist, Tehran, Iran
2- Faculty Member of Prosthetic Department, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Student Research Committee, Islamic Azad University, Tehran branch, Tehran, Iran
4- Dentist, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (21343 Views)
Background and Aims: Marginal gap measurement in all ceramic restorations they are of fundamental important for the successful used. As some studies led to contradiction results, yhe aim of this study is to compare marginal gap restorations between 4 kinds of ceramic restorations Inceram, IPS-e.max Press, Zirconia (CAD/CAM) and PFM.
Materials and Methods: In this In-vitro experimental research, one stainless steel die with deep chamfer finish line design (1 mm depth) was prepared on a maxillary premolar. 40 epoxy resin dies were made, dies were divided in to 4 groups (n=10), Zirconia, IPS e.max press, Inceram, Mental Ceramic systems (MC). Then, the prepared crowns were put on the stainless steel die and observed their marginal mismatch under sterio microscope before cementation. Data were analyzed by One- way ANOVA, and one sample kolmogorosmirnov tests.
Resultes: There was significant difference in the marginal gaps between (MC) (102.92±28.7), Inceram (98.41±24.91), IPS e.max press (128.22±25.48), and Zirconia (69.5±10.9) (P=0.0001).
Conclusion: The comparison of marginal gap for the four groups was significant test. Therefore, it can be concluded that marginal gap, the probability of leakage and recurrence of caries in Zirconia systems is the least and in the IPS e.max press systems is the most.
Materials and Methods: In this In-vitro experimental research, one stainless steel die with deep chamfer finish line design (1 mm depth) was prepared on a maxillary premolar. 40 epoxy resin dies were made, dies were divided in to 4 groups (n=10), Zirconia, IPS e.max press, Inceram, Mental Ceramic systems (MC). Then, the prepared crowns were put on the stainless steel die and observed their marginal mismatch under sterio microscope before cementation. Data were analyzed by One- way ANOVA, and one sample kolmogorosmirnov tests.
Resultes: There was significant difference in the marginal gaps between (MC) (102.92±28.7), Inceram (98.41±24.91), IPS e.max press (128.22±25.48), and Zirconia (69.5±10.9) (P=0.0001).
Conclusion: The comparison of marginal gap for the four groups was significant test. Therefore, it can be concluded that marginal gap, the probability of leakage and recurrence of caries in Zirconia systems is the least and in the IPS e.max press systems is the most.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
general
Received: 2018/02/27 | Accepted: 2018/02/27 | Published: 2018/02/27
Received: 2018/02/27 | Accepted: 2018/02/27 | Published: 2018/02/27
Send email to the article author
| Rights and Permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
