MARATTO

article · Scientific Reports

Qualitative surface roughness of lithium disilicate endo-crown for pulpotomized primary molars

20243 citationsOpen accessSuez University

Abstract

Rehabilitation of pulpotomized primary molars with an appropriate restoration is essential for recovering function and safeguarding the durability of the treatment. This study aimed to assess and compare the surface roughness of stainless steel (ST) crowns, zirconia (ZR) crowns, fiberglass (FG) crowns, and lithium disilicate (LD) endo-crowns as a restoration for pulpotomized primary molars also, evaluating the surface roughness of their antagonists. Sixty pulpotomized primary mandibular first molars were used for qualitative surface roughness evaluation and divided into four groups (n = 15/group) according to the crown type (group-ST, group-ZR, group-FG, group-LD). While the other sixty sound, unprepared primary maxillary first molars were used for evaluation of their surface roughness against the tested crowns. Specimens' preparation and cementation were carried out according to each crown type and manufacturer's instructions. The surface roughness was done using a two-body wear test. The data were statistically analyzed. All tested crowns showed an increased change in surface roughness, except group-ZR, which had the least change in surface roughness after mechanical wear with no statistically significant difference(P = 0.681). All crown types significantly increased the surface roughness of their antagonists after mechanical wear, except group-ST which showed insignificant affection (p ≥ 0.05). Zirconia crowns and lithium disilicate endo-crowns had the least change in surface roughness compared to other groups while SSCs showed the least tooth loss in the antagonist enamel.

Research topics

  • Dental materials and restorations
  • Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments
  • Dental Radiography and Imaging

Sustainable Development Goals

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-68689-w

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

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.