Link to the University of Pittsburgh Homepage
Link to the University Library System Homepage Link to the Contact Us Form

Marginal Fit of CAD/CAM Crowns Milled From Two Different Ceramic Materials: Lithium Disilicate and Advanced Lithium Disilicate

Perez Canals, Marta (2023) Marginal Fit of CAD/CAM Crowns Milled From Two Different Ceramic Materials: Lithium Disilicate and Advanced Lithium Disilicate. Master's Thesis, University of Pittsburgh. (Unpublished)

[img] PDF
Restricted to University of Pittsburgh users only until 1 July 2025.

Download (714kB) | Request a Copy


Purpose: To evaluate the marginal fit of CAD/CAM crowns milled from two different ceramic materials: Lithium disilicate and Advanced lithium disilicate (Lithium disilicate + Virgilite).

Materials and Methods: A prefabricated typodont tooth #8 pre-prepared for an all-ceramic crown was imaged using CEREC Omnicam. A total of 28 crowns were milled from a single design: 14 CEREC Tessera (Dentsply Sirona), and 14 IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent) using CEREC MC XL milling machine. All samples were digitalized for 3D digital analysis. A single scan of the master die was obtained, and the intaglio surface of each crown was scanned. All scans were imported to Geomagic Control X software, and the master die was aligned with the intaglio surface of each sample. 3D compare was done to get an average measurement of marginal gap between the master die and the intaglio surface of each crown throughout the whole marginal area. Additionally, 8 points were selected on the margin to get measurements at specific areas: Buccal (B), MesioBuccal (MB), Mesial (M), MesioLingual (ML), Lingual (L), DistoLingual (DL), Distal (D), and DistoBuccal (DB). Data were analyzed using two-sample t-test.

Results: In general, the values of CEREC Tessera were slightly lower than IPS e.max CAD. The average for Tessera was 69.4 μm, while the average for e.max CAD was 71.1 μm. Statistical analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the average between the two groups (p=0.0075). When analyzing each of the 8 points individually, significant differences were found on DB (p=0.0033), D (p=0.00), L (p=0.00), and M (p=0.0012).

Conclusions: Advanced lithium disilicate produces very good marginal integrity. Marginal gap values for both groups are all clinically acceptable (<120 μm). Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that advanced lithium disilicate material performs equal or slightly better than lithium disilicate in terms of marginal fit.


Social Networking:
Share |


Item Type: University of Pittsburgh ETD
Status: Unpublished
CreatorsEmailPitt UsernameORCID
Perez Canals, Martamap416@pitt.eduMAP416
ETD Committee:
TitleMemberEmail AddressPitt UsernameORCID
Committee ChairAntonopoulou,
Committee MemberKarayazgan,
Committee MemberShah,
Committee MemberKunkel,
Date: 1 July 2023
Date Type: Publication
Defense Date: 25 May 2023
Approval Date: 1 July 2023
Submission Date: 8 June 2023
Access Restriction: 2 year -- Restrict access to University of Pittsburgh for a period of 2 years.
Number of Pages: 17
Institution: University of Pittsburgh
Schools and Programs: School of Dental Medicine > Dental Science
Degree: MS - Master of Science
Thesis Type: Master's Thesis
Refereed: Yes
Uncontrolled Keywords: Marginal gap, marginal integrity, advanced lithium dislicate, CEREC Tessera, lithium dislicate, IPS e.max CAD
Date Deposited: 01 Jul 2023 13:34
Last Modified: 01 Jul 2023 13:34


Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item