Cargando…
The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press
AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the vertical marginal discrepancy of computer-aided design (CAD)/computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) and pressable lithium disilicate onlays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary first premolar typodont tooth was prepared to receive lithium disilica...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6873597/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31802815 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_31_19 |
_version_ | 1783472697070583808 |
---|---|
author | Gudugunta, Leneena Mynampati, Praffulla Jeevan, Matada Basavarajaiah Kumar, Sathiyavathi Mahendra Akkaloori, Anitha Tejavath, Sai Krishna |
author_facet | Gudugunta, Leneena Mynampati, Praffulla Jeevan, Matada Basavarajaiah Kumar, Sathiyavathi Mahendra Akkaloori, Anitha Tejavath, Sai Krishna |
author_sort | Gudugunta, Leneena |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the vertical marginal discrepancy of computer-aided design (CAD)/computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) and pressable lithium disilicate onlays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary first premolar typodont tooth was prepared to receive lithium disilicate onlay. Mesio-occluso-distal cavity was prepared with palatal cusp reduction and collar preparation. In the proximal box, gingival seat was placed 1 mm coronal to the cementoenamel junction and mesiodistal width of the seat was kept to 1 mm. Thirty stone models were prepared from thirty rubber base impressions and divided into two groups, based on the technique of fabrication of onlays: (1) Group CL (CAD/CAM lithium disilicate) and (2) Group PL (Pressable lithium disilicate). Fifteen onlays per each group were fabricated by following the manufacturer instructions. Marginal fit of all the samples were analyzed by using stereomicroscope with Image Analysis software. Statistical analysis was done by t-test. RESULTS: Statistical significant difference was found between both the groups. The lowest marginal discrepancy (41.46 μm) was measured for Group CL (CAD/CAM lithium disilicate) specimens, and the highest (55.95 μm) discrepancy was observed on the Group PL (Pressable lithium disilicate) specimens. CONCLUSION: Although there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups, marginal gap of both the groups were in clinically acceptable levels. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6873597 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68735972019-12-04 The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press Gudugunta, Leneena Mynampati, Praffulla Jeevan, Matada Basavarajaiah Kumar, Sathiyavathi Mahendra Akkaloori, Anitha Tejavath, Sai Krishna J Conserv Dent Original Article AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the vertical marginal discrepancy of computer-aided design (CAD)/computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) and pressable lithium disilicate onlays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary first premolar typodont tooth was prepared to receive lithium disilicate onlay. Mesio-occluso-distal cavity was prepared with palatal cusp reduction and collar preparation. In the proximal box, gingival seat was placed 1 mm coronal to the cementoenamel junction and mesiodistal width of the seat was kept to 1 mm. Thirty stone models were prepared from thirty rubber base impressions and divided into two groups, based on the technique of fabrication of onlays: (1) Group CL (CAD/CAM lithium disilicate) and (2) Group PL (Pressable lithium disilicate). Fifteen onlays per each group were fabricated by following the manufacturer instructions. Marginal fit of all the samples were analyzed by using stereomicroscope with Image Analysis software. Statistical analysis was done by t-test. RESULTS: Statistical significant difference was found between both the groups. The lowest marginal discrepancy (41.46 μm) was measured for Group CL (CAD/CAM lithium disilicate) specimens, and the highest (55.95 μm) discrepancy was observed on the Group PL (Pressable lithium disilicate) specimens. CONCLUSION: Although there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups, marginal gap of both the groups were in clinically acceptable levels. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6873597/ /pubmed/31802815 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_31_19 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Gudugunta, Leneena Mynampati, Praffulla Jeevan, Matada Basavarajaiah Kumar, Sathiyavathi Mahendra Akkaloori, Anitha Tejavath, Sai Krishna The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press |
title | The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press |
title_full | The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press |
title_fullStr | The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press |
title_full_unstemmed | The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press |
title_short | The marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: Computer-aided design versus press |
title_sort | marginal discrepancy of lithium disilicate onlays: computer-aided design versus press |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6873597/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31802815 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_31_19 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guduguntaleneena themarginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT mynampatipraffulla themarginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT jeevanmatadabasavarajaiah themarginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT kumarsathiyavathimahendra themarginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT akkaloorianitha themarginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT tejavathsaikrishna themarginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT guduguntaleneena marginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT mynampatipraffulla marginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT jeevanmatadabasavarajaiah marginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT kumarsathiyavathimahendra marginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT akkaloorianitha marginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress AT tejavathsaikrishna marginaldiscrepancyoflithiumdisilicateonlayscomputeraideddesignversuspress |