article · Egyptian Dental Journal /Egyptian Dental Journal
Objective: This research aimed to evaluate & compare marginal accuracy & fracture resistance of three different CAD/CAM fabricated monolithic vonlays. Materials & Methods: A typodont maxillary second premolar was prepared to receive thirty CAD/CAM monolithic vonlays. Three groups of different materials (n=10) were constructed. Group(CD): Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Celtra Duo). Group(VE):Hybrid ceramic(Vita Enamic). Group(BC): Reinforced composite (BRILLIANT Crios). Measurement of vertical marginal gap distance was performed at 16 predetermined points without cementation. Fracture resistance test was conducted for cemented vonlays on their respective epoxy dies.Results: Difference in vertical marginal gap of the three groups was not statistically significant, while fracture resistance showed a significant difference between the three groups. Conclusions: The three tested materials offered vonlays with comparable & clinically acceptable marginal gaps. Concerning the fracture resistance, only Brilliant Crios & Celtra Duo vonlays were proven to have acceptable fracture resistance in premolar area, while Vita Enamic is not recommended as a vonlay in the same area.KEY WORDS: Marginal accuracy, fracture resistance, vonlay, Celtra Duo, Vita Enamic, BRILLIANT Crios.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.21608/edj.2023.238829.2724
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
