Aleksandra Pecheva‡, Kostadin Georgiev‡, Snezhana Tsanova‡, Ralitsa Raycheva‡Corresponding author: Aleksandra Pecheva ( aleksandra_pecheva@hotmail.com ) © Aleksandra Pecheva, Kostadin Georgiev, Snezhana Tsanova, Ralitsa Raycheva. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Citation:
Pecheva A, Georgiev K, Tsanova S, Raycheva R (2020) A Comparative In Vitro Study Evaluating the Marginal Adaptation of Zirconium Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacture and Press-ceramic Veneers. Folia Medica 62(3): 546-552. https://doi.org/10.3897/folmed.62.e49708 |  |
Introduction: One method to evaluate the clinical success of cemented restorations is measuring the marginal adaptation. There is a correlation between the fitting of the restoration and problems caused by clinically undetectable passage of bacteria between the tooth structure and the veneer.
Aim: To evaluate in comparison the marginal adaptation of veneers produced via CAD/CAM and press technique.
Materials and methods: 32 extracted incisors are divided into two equal-number groups (n=16) according to the production technique – CAD/CAM zirconium veneers and press-ceramic veneers. Cut sections are examined under a SEM magnification. Marginal accuracy is measured as the distance between the finish line of the tooth and the margin of the veneer at eight fixed locations.
Results: The mean values of marginal gap of group 1 are: external adaptation – 79.88±3.71 µm; internal adaptation – 79.14±15.70 µm; cervical adaptation – 82.39±28.55 µm; incisal adaptation – 86.85±21.72 µm. The mean values of marginal gap of group 2 are: external adaptation – 100.31±2.16 µm; for internal adaptation – 101.01±12.51 µm; cervical adaptation – 91.55±3.31 µm; incisal adaptation – 93.76±2.54 µm.
Conclusions: Veneers produced via CAD/CAM technology have better fit at the external and internal marginal wall. There is no statistically significant difference between the gaps at the cervical and the incisal areas.