A Comparative Study of the Marginal Fit of Endocrowns Fabricated From Three Different Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) Ceramic Materials: An In Vitro Study

Abstract

Introduction: The marginal seal and adaptation are important factors for successful restoration. An inadequate marginal seal can lead to bacterial microleakage, plaque accumulation, and eventually treatment failure This in vitro study aimed to compare the marginal gap of endocrowns fabricated from three different computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic materials.

Methods: Thirty extracted mandibular molars were selected for the study. Endocrown preparations were completed after root canal treatment. Teeth were divided into three groups to receive endocrowns fabricated of lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein), zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (VITA Suprinity®, VITA Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany), and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (VITA Enamic®, VITA Zahnfabrik). The digital impressions were transferred to the design software to construct the endocrowns. The endocrowns were milled and cemented. The marginal fit was examined using a digital camera stereomicroscope at a magnification of 80X. Images were transferred to Image-J software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States) to measure the marginal gap.

Results: One-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in the marginal gap between the different ceramic groups (P=0.006). Tukey's Honest Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc test showed that VITA Suprinity had significantly higher gap width values than VITA Enamic (P=0.005). No significant differences in gap width values were found between VITA Enamic and IPS e.max CAD or between VITA Suprinity and IPS e.max CAD (P>0.05).

Conclusion: The marginal gap of endocrown restorations varies with different CAD/CAM materials (zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic, polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic, and lithium disilicate glass-ceramic), but are all within clinically acceptable marginal gap width.

Keywords: endocrown; ips e.max cad; marginal fit; marginal gap; vita enamic; vita suprinity.

Figure 1. Specimen of the prepared tooth and corresponding milled endocrown

Figure 2. Seating of the endocrowns using a Multitest 2.5i machine*

* Mecmesin Limited, Horsham, United Kingdom

Figure 3. Specimen under stereomicroscope showing the midbuccal surface (B), mesiobuccal (MB), and distobuccal (DB). (a) Magnification 10x; (b, c, d) Magnification 80x