Next Article in Journal
Grain Boundary Evolution of Cold-Rolled FePd Alloy during Recrystallization at Disordering Temperature
Next Article in Special Issue
Quantitative Analysis of Defects at the Dentin-Post Space in Endodontically Treated Teeth
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
Structural, Surface, in vitro Bacterial Adhesion and Biofilm Formation Analysis of Three Dental Restorative Composites
Open AccessArticle

Microleakage of Different Self-Adhesive Materials for Lithium Disilicate CAD/CAM Crowns

1
Department of Biological and Material Sciences in Dentistry, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred Herrhausenstrasse 44, 58455 Witten, Germany
2
Point Dr. Prünte und Partner Bergpfad 7, 59423 Unna, Germany
3
Institute for Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred Herrhausenstrasse 50, 58448 Witten, Germany
4
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred Herrhausenstrasse 44, 58455 Witten, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Ihtesham ur Rehman
Materials 2015, 8(6), 3238-3253; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma8063238
Received: 5 February 2015 / Accepted: 27 May 2015 / Published: 3 June 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Dental Materials)
Objectives: To evaluate the microleakage and marginal gap of various luting materials after cementing ceramic crowns. Methods: Cervical margins of human molars were designed as circular chamfers. Cementation of full-contour ceramic crowns was conducted with zinc-phosphate cement (Harvard cement), resin cement (Panavia F 2.0) and self-adhesive resin cements (RelyX Unicem, BifixSE, MaxCem Elite, PermaCem2.0, G-Cem). Aging of specimens was performed in artificial saliva, at 37 °C for four weeks and thermocycling. The marginal gap was measured with a scanning electron microscope and silver precipitation within the microleakage. All data were compared statistically. Results: Independent of the margin preparation, the highest median value for microleakage was 320.2 μm (Harvard cement), and the lowest was 0 μm (Panavia F 2.0). The median value for enamel was 0 µm and for dentin 270.9 μm (p < 0.001), which was independent of the luting material. The marginal and absolute marginal gaps were not significantly different between the tested materials. There was no correlation between microleakage and the marginal gaps. Conclusion: Significant differences in microleakage were found between the tested luting materials (p < 0.05). Independent from the luting materials, the microleakage in dentin showed significantly higher values than in enamel. View Full-Text
Keywords: luting materials; microleakage; marginal gap; marginal adaptation; marginal sealing; CAD/CAM crowns; indirect restoration; cementation luting materials; microleakage; marginal gap; marginal adaptation; marginal sealing; CAD/CAM crowns; indirect restoration; cementation
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Naumova, E.A.; Valta, A.; Schaper, K.; Arnold, W.H.; Piwowarczyk, A. Microleakage of Different Self-Adhesive Materials for Lithium Disilicate CAD/CAM Crowns. Materials 2015, 8, 3238-3253.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Back to TopTop