Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: ABDULLAH, Adil Othman
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: TSITROU, Effrosyni A, POLLINGTON, Sarah
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Journal of applied oral science (Online)
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/117215
Resumo: bjective This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns. Material and Methods An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone “PEEK”, Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0. Results The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (P
id USP-17_56d7c391df010e69cc8f9452f639ff42
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/117215
network_acronym_str USP-17
network_name_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns bjective This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns. Material and Methods An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone “PEEK”, Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0. Results The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (PUniversidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru2016-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/11721510.1590/1678-775720150451Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 24 No. 3 (2016); 258-263Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 24 Núm. 3 (2016); 258-263Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 24 n. 3 (2016); 258-2631678-77651678-7757reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/117215/114821Copyright (c) 2016 Journal of Applied Oral Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessABDULLAH, Adil OthmanTSITROU, Effrosyni APOLLINGTON, Sarah2016-07-04T19:54:28Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/117215Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/oai||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2016-07-04T19:54:28Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
title Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
spellingShingle Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
ABDULLAH, Adil Othman
title_short Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
title_full Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
title_fullStr Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
title_full_unstemmed Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
title_sort Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns
author ABDULLAH, Adil Othman
author_facet ABDULLAH, Adil Othman
TSITROU, Effrosyni A
POLLINGTON, Sarah
author_role author
author2 TSITROU, Effrosyni A
POLLINGTON, Sarah
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv ABDULLAH, Adil Othman
TSITROU, Effrosyni A
POLLINGTON, Sarah
description bjective This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns. Material and Methods An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone “PEEK”, Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0. Results The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (P
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/117215
10.1590/1678-775720150451
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/117215
identifier_str_mv 10.1590/1678-775720150451
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/117215/114821
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 Journal of Applied Oral Science
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 Journal of Applied Oral Science
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 24 No. 3 (2016); 258-263
Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 24 Núm. 3 (2016); 258-263
Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 24 n. 3 (2016); 258-263
1678-7765
1678-7757
reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
collection Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jaos@usp.br
_version_ 1800221679640641536

Registros relacionados