MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 patients with 88 IPS e.max Press single crowns were examined at the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, using modified United States Public Health Service evaluation criteria (USPHS). These 88 crowned teeth included 19 vital and 69 nonvital teeth that were restored with different post and core materials. The periodontal status was compared using the plaque index (PI), gingival recession (GR), modified papillary bleeding index (MPBI) and probing pocket depth (PPD) between the crowned teeth and contralateral control (sound) teeth.
RESULTS: About 96.6% of the crowns exhibited satisfactory clinical performance. The mean survival rate at three years was 97.7%, and 100% at two years with a low incidence of fractures. There were no staitistically significant differences in the mean gingival recession (p = 0.182) and mean plaque scores (p = 0.102) between crowned and control teeth. The crowned teeth had higher mean MPBI (p = 0.000) and PPD (p = 0.051) compared to the contralateral sound teeth. Periodontal response in relation to subgingival crown margins, was statistically significantly lower regarding pocket depths (p = 0.01) and bleeding on probing (p = 0.00).
CONCLUSION: IPS e.max Press crowns exhibited satisfactory clinical performance with high survival rate. No dentinal sensitivity was recorded. Plaque retention and gingival recession were similar to contralateral control teeth. Poor periodontal health was related to the subgingival crown margins.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Clinical outcomes were assessed in 47 patients with 88 LD crowns using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria and survival rates. The questionnaire for predictors included 3 aspects: (a) sociodemographic characteristics, (b) oral health habits (tooth brushing frequency, flossing frequency, and dental visits), and (c) satisfaction of the restorations (aesthetics, function, fit, cleansability, and chewing ability of the crowns, and overall satisfaction). Frequency distributions were computed using univariate and multivariate analysis. The Student t test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare means across variables. Correlation analysis was done to assess the association between continuous variables.
RESULTS: The age of crowns was 34.7 ± 9.7 months. The survival rate was 96.6% at 35.9 ± 9.2 months. There was a significant association between successful crown function and oral hygiene measures: tooth brushing (p˂ 0.001), dental visits (p = 0.006), and flossing (p = 0.009). A strong negative correlation was observed between aesthetic satisfaction (r = -0.717, p˂ 0.001) and chewing ability (r = -0.639, p˂ 0.001) with crown age. The linear regression model was significant for all predictors (p < 0.05) except overall satisfaction (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The LD crowns had long survival rates of 96.6% up to 35.9 ± 9.2 months and provided satisfactory clinical performance (low risk of failure). Oral hygiene habits such as brushing, flossing, and regular dental visits influenced patient satisfaction with LD crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixmaster dies were duplicated from the prepared maxillary first premolar tooth using nonprecious metal alloy (Wiron 99). Ten copings of 0.6 mm thickness were fabricated from each type of ceramic, for a total of thirty copings. Two master dies were used for each group, and each of them was used to lute five copings. All groups were cemented with resin luting cement Panavia F according to manufacturer's instructions and received a static load of 5 kg during cementation. After 24 hours of distilled water storage at 37 degrees C, the copings were vertically compressed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min.
RESULTS: The results of the present study showed the following mean loads at fracture: Turkom-Cera (2184 +/- 164 N), In-Ceram (2042 +/- 200 N), and Procera AllCeram (1954 +/- 211 N). ANOVA and Scheffe's post hoc test showed that the mean load at fracture of Turkom-Cera was significantly different from Procera AllCeram (p < 0.05). Scheffe's post hoc test showed no significant difference between the mean load at fracture of Turkom-Cera and In-Ceram or between the mean load at fracture of In-Ceram and Procera AllCeram.
CONCLUSION: Because Turkom-Cera demonstrated equal to or higher loads at fracture than currently accepted all-ceramic materials, it would seem to be acceptable for fabrication of anterior and posterior ceramic crowns.