ABSTRACT
Scanning electron microscopy was used to compare the marginal gaps of restorations milled by machinable ceramic systems to the marginal gaps of conventional laboratory-sintered ceramic restorations. For occlusal surfaces, the average marginal gap was 80 microns for both laboratory- and Celay-produced inlays. The mean gap was 200 microns and 170 microns, respectively, for Cerec T (turbine motor) and Cerec EM (electric motor) inlays. For approximal boxes, the average marginal gap was 100 microns for inlays produced with conventional laboratory-sintering techniques, 80 microns for Celay restorations, and 280 microns for the Cerec T restorations, and 260 microns for Cerec EM-machined inlays. The ceramics used, as well as the different systems themselves, can influence the results and the clinical outcome of the restorations.
Subject(s)
Dental Marginal Adaptation , Dental Polishing/methods , Dental Porcelain , Inlays , Ceramics , Dental Polishing/instrumentation , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Humans , Microscopy, Electron, ScanningABSTRACT
CELAY is a machinable ceramic system that is capable of milling inlays, onlays, and veneers from prefabricated industrial ceramic blocks. Direct intraoral or indirect patterns may be used to make ceramic restorations. Scanning electron microscopy was used to analyze the marginal gap of restorations obtained with both methods. The direct fabrication technique yielded significantly better marginal gap sizes (P < .01) for the interproximal areas, while with the indirect (P < .01) fabrication technique the restorations showed significantly smaller marginal gaps at the occlusal borders. The clinical relevance of these findings and their possible applications for the development of a new impression material are discussed.
Subject(s)
Dental Marginal Adaptation , Dental Polishing/methods , Dental Porcelain , Inlays , Dental Polishing/instrumentation , Humans , Microscopy, Electron, Scanning , Surface PropertiesABSTRACT
We present a case of a young male who was referred to our clinic because of a deep caries on the first lower left molar. The patient refused conservative treatment, and the caries progressed. After 2 years the first lower left molar had to be extracted. During standard x-ray procedures, a deeply impacted second lower left premolar was diagnosed. The boy was followed by our staff, and surgery was performed at proper time to enable eruption of the second lower left premolar. Orthodontic treatment allowed us to bring the element in a suitable position to place a provisional Maryland bridge. At a later stage the missing element (first lower left molar) will be replaced by an osteointegrated implant.
