Purpose: Evaluate the marginal fit of different monolithic ceramic crowns for prepared teeth with vertical and horizontal finish lines. Materials & Methods: Sixty monolithic ceramic crowns were fabricated, divided equally into two groups: vertical finish line preparation design (VFL) and horizontal finish line preparation design (HFL). Each group was divided according to the utilized ceramic material into three subgroups (n=10). Subgroup {CZI}: Zirconia (Ceramill Zolid), subgroup {VE}: Hybrid ceramic (Vita Enamic) and subgroup {CD}: Zirconia reinforced Lithium Silicate (Celtra Duo). Vertical gaps of all ceramic crowns were measured at 20 predetermined points without cementation. Results: All marginal gap results lied within the clinically acceptable range. {VFL} Group: {VE}subgroup showed the lowest mean marginal gap followed by {CZI} then {CD}subgroups with statistically significant difference between {VE}&{CD}subgroups. {CZI} showed a non-significant difference with and {VE} and {CD} subgroups. {HFL} Group: {VE}subgroup showed the lowest mean marginal gap value followed by {CD} then {CZI}with a statistically significant difference between the three subgroups. All {VFL}, subgroups showed significantly higher marginal gaps compared to their corresponding subgroups in the {HFL} group.Conclusions: Both finish line preparations offered clinically acceptable marginal gaps for the 3 ceramic materials used, although each material presented significantly different marginal gaps with both preparations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salem et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: