Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 103, Issue 2 , Pages 80-90, February 2010

Three-year clinical evaluation of two ceramic crown systems: A preliminary study

  • Maged K. Etman, DDS, MSc, MMedSc, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Associate Professor, Division of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author: Dr Maged K. Etman, Division of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Saskatchewan, 209 Dental Clinic Building, 105 Wiggins Road, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5E4, CANADA, Fax: 306-966-7631
    • ,
  • M.J. Woolford, BDS, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Senior Lecturer, Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry, King's College London Dental Institute, London, UK

Statement of problem

The clinical performance and failure mechanisms of recently introduced ceramic crown systems used to restore posterior teeth have not been adequately examined.

Purpose

The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of 2 new ceramic crown systems with that of metal ceramic crowns using modified United States Public Health Services (USPHS) criteria.

Material and methods

Ninety posterior teeth requiring crown restorations in 48 patients were randomized into 3 equal groups (n=30) for which different crown systems were used: an experimental hot-pressed glass ceramic based on a modified lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS e.max Press), an alumina-coping-based ceramic (Procera AllCeram), and a metal ceramic (Simidur S 2 veneered with IPS Classic Porcelain). The crowns were assessed over 3 years using the modified USPHS criteria. Crowns that developed visible cracks were sectioned and removed, and the surfaces were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric statistical test, followed by the Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni correction (α=.05).

Results

USPHS evaluation showed that the IPS e.max Press and metal ceramic crowns experienced fewer clinical changes than Procera AllCeram. Visible roughness, wear, and deformity were noticed in occlusal contact areas of Procera AllCeram crowns. SEM images showed well defined wear facets in both ceramic crown systems. Kruskal-Wallis tests showed a significant difference (P<.05) in Alpha scores among the 3 crown systems. Mann-Whitney tests showed significant differences among groups.

Conclusions

IPS e.max Press crowns demonstrated clinical behavior comparable to Procera AllCeram and metal ceramic crowns, but the wear resistance of this crown type was superior to the Procera AllCeram crowns, according to modified USPHS criteria.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 15.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This paper was presented in part at the International Association for Dental Research (IADR)/Canadian Association for Dental Research (CADR)/American Association for Dental Research (AADR) meeting, Hawaii, March 2004.

PII: S0022-3913(10)60010-8

doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60010-8

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 103, Issue 2 , Pages 80-90, February 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution