Comparison of marginal fit and internal adaptation of copings fabricated with polyetheretherketone and zirconia – An In vitro study
Context: Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare the Marginal fit and Internal adaptation of copings fabricated with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and Zirconia luted with resin cements. Materials and Methods: Maxillary first premolar was prepared to receive all ceramic rest...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/f2c250751dca4b0189ccbbdbd18159ad |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Context: Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare the Marginal fit and Internal adaptation of copings fabricated with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and Zirconia luted with resin cements. Materials and Methods: Maxillary first premolar was prepared to receive all ceramic restoration. It was duplicated using addition silicon impression material for fabricating Cobalt–Chromium metal die, which is used as a master die. Using the master die, 30 heat cure acrylic samples were fabricated for the heat cure acrylic tooth models on which 15 PEEK and 15 zirconia copings were made. Self-adhesive resin cement is used for luting and 30 copings were luted. After 24 h, luted copings were having a disc of thickness 0.01 mm cutting at high speed using a Tooth cutting lathe for all the 30 samples. Field Scanning Electron Microscopic study analysis for evaluating marginal fit and internal adaptation of two groups were observed. The values were then analyzed using one-way ANOVA (post hoc) followed by Dunnet t-test. Results: Among those two groups, PEEK copings group materials showed the lowest mean value of (30.3 ± 5.1) for marginal gap, (29.1 ± 5.8) for internal gap whereas the zirconia copings group showed a mean value of (50.26 ± 16.02) and (32.8 ± 5.2) respectively. Conclusion: Among these two groups, comparatively less marginal fit and internal adaptation is seen in zirconia copings when compared to the PEEK copings. While the marginal fit and internal adaptation of both PEEK and zirconia copings were in the acceptable clinical range. |
|---|