Vertical marginal gap and internal fit of virgilite‐based lithium disilicate glass ceramic veneers with different preparation designs

AbstractPurposeTo evaluate and compare internal fit and marginal adaptation of conventional lithium disilicate (LDS) glass ceramics and LDS containing virgilite computer‐aided design and manufacturing (CAD‐CAM) blocks before and after aging.Materials and MethodsSeventy‐two epoxy replicated dies from two prepared maxillary right central incisors acrylic typodont were divided into two groups of different preparation designs (n = 36): Group I, incisal butt‐joint, and Group P, incisal overlap. Each group was further subdivided into two equal groups according to ceramic material (n = 18): Group E, IPS e.max CAD, and Group T, Tessera advanced lithium disilicate (ALD) CAD‐CAM blocks. The replica technique was used to assess the internal fit using a stereomicroscope at 45× magnification. Laminate veneers were cemented to their corresponding epoxy dies, then the vertical marginal gap was evaluated before and after thermal cycling. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for marginal fit data and 2‐way ANOVA for internal fit measurements (α = 0.05).ResultsFor internal fit, there were no significant differences between tested groups. For vertical marginal gap results, two‐way ANOVA showed that only aging had a significant effect on the vertical marginal gap (p < 0.001), while different CAD‐CAM materials and preparation designs did not affect the vertical marginal gap.ConclusionsThe vertical marginal gap and internal fits of IPS e.max CAD and CEREC Tessera CAD for both preparation designs were comparable. Aging significantly affected the vertical marginal gap of the laminate veneers of both materials and both preparation designs; however, all were within clinically acceptable ranges before and after aging.