These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Marginal Adaptation and Fracture Resistance of Lithium Disilicate Laminate Veneers on Teeth with Different Preparation Depths.
    Author: Tuğcu E, Vanlıoğlu B, Özkan YK, Aslan YU.
    Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2018; 38(Suppl):s87–s95. PubMed ID: 29513770.
    Abstract:
    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation and fracture load of ceramic laminate veneers on teeth with different preparation depths. A total of 75 extracted intact human maxillary central incisors were prepared with three different preparation depths (P) and assigned to the following five groups (n = 15): P1 (0.3-mm depth of preparation; preparation entirely in enamel); P2 (0.5-mm depth of preparation; preparation in enamel and dentin complex); P3 (1-mm depth of preparation; preparation entirely in dentin); P4 (no preparation, only surface roughening); and P5 (unrestored, intact teeth as control). A total of 60 lithium disilicate laminate veneers were fabricated. The marginal adaptation of the veneers was evaluated by light microscope and scanning electron microscope after cementation with resin cement. Finally, the veneers were loaded until fracture at a 90-degree angle to the lingual surface of the tooth. Statistical analyses were performed using analysis of variance and Tukey multiple range test. There was a significant difference between the marginal gap value of the distocervical measurement points of P1 and P2 and the distal measurement points of P3 and P4 (P = .33 and P = .017, respectively). The highest fracture resistance values were observed in the P5 group (mean: 389.55 ± 22 N) and the P2 group (mean: 322.86 ± 79.38 N), and the lowest values were observed in the P3 group (mean: 219.21 ± 60.74 N). The marginal adaptation of the laminate veneer restorations was not related to the depth of preparation. Mean fracture resistance of laminate veneers with 0.5-mm preparation depth was greater than that of the 0.3-mm and 1-mm preparation depth laminate veneers and those with no preparation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]