Marginal Fit Comparison of CAD/CAM Crowns Milled from Two Different Materials

AbstractPurposeTo evaluate the marginal fit of CAD/CAM copings milled from hybrid ceramic (Vita Enamic) blocks and lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) blocks, and to evaluate the effect of crystallization firing on the marginal fit of lithium disilicate copings.Materials and MethodsA standardized metal die with a 1‐mm‐wide shoulder finish line was imaged using the CEREC AC Bluecam. The coping was designed using CEREC 3 software. The design was used to fabricate 15 lithium disilicate and 15 hybrid ceramic copings. Design and milling were accomplished by one operator. The copings were seated on the metal die using a pressure clamp with a uniform pressure of 5.5 lbs. A Macroview Microscope (14×) was used for direct viewing of the marginal gap. Four areas were imaged on each coping (buccal, distal, lingual, mesial). Image analysis software was used to measure the marginal gaps in μm at 15 randomly selected points on each of the four surfaces. A total of 60 measurements were made per specimen. For lithium disilicate copings the measurements for marginal gap were made before and after crystallization firing. Data were analyzed using paired t‐test and Kruskal‐Wallis test.ResultsThe overall mean difference in marginal gap between the hybrid ceramic and crystallized lithium disilicate copings was statistically significant (p < 0.01). Greater mean marginal gaps were measured for crystallized lithium disilicate copings. The overall mean difference in marginal gap before and after firing (precrystallized and crystallized lithium disilicate copings) showed an average of 62 μm increase in marginal gap after firing. This difference was also significant (p < 0.01).ConclusionsA significant difference exists in the marginal gap discrepancy when comparing hybrid ceramic and lithium disilicate CAD/CAM crowns. Also crystallization firing can result in a significant increase in the marginal gap of lithium disilicate CAD/CAM crowns.