The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of laboratory and chairside fabricated monolithic anterior and posterior LDGC CAD/CAM crowns performed by predoctoral students at the University of Toronto and the effect of different patient and provider-related factors on their longevity and to compare them to the metal-ceramic (MC) crowns. A sample of LDGC CAD/CAM crowns (IPS e.max, Ivoclar Vivadent) provided by predoctoral students was evaluated. Crown preparations were made according to the specific criteria and were milled in-house using the CEREC bluecam and Omnicam systems. Crowns were cemented with Rely-X Unicem (3M/ESPE) and Calibra Universal (Dentsply Sirona) resin cements. Clinical assessment of the crowns and supporting periodontal structures was performed following the modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria. Intra-oral photographs, periapical and bitewing radiographs were taken for further assessment by two evaluators. Two-hundred and fifty-one patients with 275 crowns were examined with a follow-up period of up to 6 years.
The clinical success of the monolithic Lithium-disilicate Glass-ceramic (LDGC) crowns manufactured with computer-aided design (CAD) / computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) technology provided by predoctoral students was not investigated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of laboratory and chairside fabricated monolithic anterior and posterior LDGC CAD/CAM crowns performed by predoctoral students at the University of Toronto and the effect of different patient and provider-related factors on their longevity and to compare them to the metal-ceramic (MC) crowns. A sample of LDGC CAD/CAM crowns (IPS e.max, Ivoclar Vivadent) provided by predoctoral students was evaluated. Crown preparations were made according to the specific criteria and were milled in-house using the CEREC bluecam and Omnicam systems. Crowns were cemented with Rely-X Unicem (3M/ESPE) and Calibra Universal (Dentsply Sirona) resin cements. Clinical assessment of the crowns and supporting periodontal structures was performed following the modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria. Intra-oral photographs, periapical and bitewing radiographs were taken for further assessment by two evaluators. Two-hundred and fifty-one patients with 275 crowns were examined with a follow-up period of up to 6 years. Part 1 evaluated the performance of laboratory-fabricated LDGC CAD/CAM crowns. Part 2 evaluated the performance of chairside LDGC CAD/CAM crowns. Forty crowns were evaluated. Part 3 evaluated the performance of LDGC CAD/CAM and MC crowns using split-mouth design. A total of 25 patients and 50 crowns (25 crowns for each group) were examined.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
251
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Survival percentage
Kaplan Meier analysis of survival of the crowns
Time frame: 6 years
Clinical performance of crowns via modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria
Biological complications: pulpal involvement, recurrent caries, tooth fracture. Technical complications: marginal integrity (slight marginal discrepancy, open margins, marginal overhang, under-contoured margins), loss of retention, crown fracture, chipping/crack lines, open proximal contact. Esthetic complications: surface texture/smoothness, color match/mismatch, marginal discoloration, over or under-contoured.
Time frame: 6 years
Patient satisfaction with esthetic and function of crowns
Using Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
Time frame: 6 years
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.