World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  15 (2024)
Volume  14 (2023)
Volume  13 (2022)
Volume  12 (2021)
Volume  11 (2020)
Volume  10 (2019)
Volume  9 (2018)
Volume  8 (2017)
Volume  7 (2016)
Volume  6 (2015)
Volume  5 (2014)
Volume  4 (2013)
Volume  3 (2012)
Volume  2 (2011)
Volume  1 (2010)
Related articles

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Evaluation of IPS Empress CAD versus ZLS Ceramic Laminate Veneers: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Omnia MW El-Mesallamy, Hayat IM EL-Banna, Mohammed L Zamzam, Jylan F El-Guindy, Ahmed S Idris

Citation Information :

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1813

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-06-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim and objective: To evaluate fracture resistance, patient satisfaction, and survival rate of IPS Empress CAD vs zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (ZLS) laminate veneers. Materials and methods: Fifty-four ceramic laminate veneers were fabricated for maxillary anterior teeth. The patients were divided into three groups according to the material group I (control group) fabricated from IPS Empress CAD laminate veneers, group II (intervention group I) fabricated from glazed CELTRA DUO laminate veneers, and group III (intervention group II) fabricated from VITA SUPRINITY laminate veneers. Standardized the same preparation with butt joint design and chamfer finish line located supra gingival were performed for all the teeth. The fabrication of the veneers was performed using CADCAM (Ceramill motion) machine, with software (Exocad). The veneers surfaces were treated and silanated according to the manufacturer's instruction of each ceramic and enamel surfaces were etched where total etch adhesive protocol was obeyed using dual cured amine free adhesive resin cement. Fracture resistance, patient satisfaction, and survival rate for all groups were evaluated according to United States Public Health Services (USPHS) criteria. Results: Fracture resistance, patient satisfaction, and survival rate were evaluated according to the criteria of USPHS and we found there is no significant difference as all groups scaled zero score. Conclusion: IPS Empress CAD, glazed CELTRA DUO, and VITA SUPRINITY laminate veneers revealed high successful clinical performance in terms of fracture resistance, patient satisfaction, and retention. Clinical significance: Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramics are recommended to be used for laminate veneers.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Shetty A, Kaiwar A, Shubhashini N, et al. Survival rates of porcelain laminate restoration based on different incisal preparation designs: an analysis. J Conserv Dent 2011;14(1):10. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.80723.
  2. Ozturk E, Bolay S. Survival of porcelain laminate veneers with different degrees of dentin exposure: 2-year clinical results. J Adhes Dent 2014;16(5):481–489.
  3. Morimoto S, Albanesi RB, Sesma N, et al. Main clinical outcomes of feldspathic porcelain and glass-ceramic laminate veneers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and complication rates. Int J Prosthodon 2016;29(1):38–49. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4315.
  4. Obradović-Đuričić KB, Medić VB, Dodić SM, et al. Porcelain veneers-preparation design: a retrospective review. Hemijska Industrija 2014;68(2):179–192. DOI: 10.2298/HEMIND130323042O.
  5. Gresnigt MM, Kalk W, Özcan M. Clinical longevity of ceramic laminate veneers bonded to teeth with and without existing composite restorations up to 40 months. Clin Oral Investigat 2013;17(3):823–832. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0790-5.
  6. Beier US, Kapferer I, Burtscher D, et al. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers for up to 20 years. Int J Prosthodon 2012;25(1):79–85.
  7. Sannino G, Germano F, Arcuri L, et al. Cerec CAD/CAM chairside system. Oral Implantol 2014;7(3):57.
  8. Rinke S, Pabel AK, Rödiger M, et al., Chairside fabrication of an all-ceramic partial crown using a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic. Case reports in dentistry. 2016 Jan 1;2016.
  9. Krüger S, Deubener J, Ritzberger C, et al. Nucleation kinetics of lithium metasilicate in ZrO2-bearing lithium disilicate glasses for dental application. Int J Appl Glass Sci 2013;4(1):9–19. DOI: 10.1111/ijag.12011.
  10. Elsaka SE, Shaymaa E, Elnaghy AM. Mechanical properties of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic. Dent Mat 2016;32(7):908–914. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.013.
  11. Flury S, Lussi A, Zimmerli B. Performance of different polishing techniques for direct CAD/CAM ceramic restorations. Operat Dentis 2010;35(4):470–481. DOI: 10.2341/09-373-L.
  12. Arif R, Dennison JB, Garcia D, et al. Retrospective evaluation of the clinical performance and longevity of porcelain laminate veneers 7 to 14 years after cementation. J Prosthe Dentis 2019;122(1):31–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.09.007.
  13. Fradeani M, Redemagni M, Corrado M. Porcelain laminate veneers: 6-to 12-year clinical evaluation--a retrospective study. Int J Periodont Restorat Dentis 2005;25(1):9–17.
  14. Granell-Ruiz M, Fons-Font A, Labaig-Rueda C, et al. A clinical longitudinal study 323 porcelain laminate veneers. Period of study from 3 to 11 years. Popul 2010;3:12.
  15. Hahn P, Gustav M, Hellwig E. An in vitro assessment of the strength of porcelain veneers dependent on tooth preparation. J Oral Rehabilitat 2000;27(12):1024–1029. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2000.00640.x.
  16. Mirra A, El-Mahalawy S. Fracture strength and microleakage of laminate veneers. Cairo Dent J 2009;25:245–254.
  17. Coldea A, Swain MV, Thiel N. In-vitro strength degradation of dental ceramics and novel PICN material by sharp indentation. J Mechan Behav Biomed Mater 2013;26:34–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.05.004.
  18. Manicone PF, Iommetti PR, Raffaelli L. An overview of zirconia ceramics: basic properties and clinical applications. J Dentis 2007;35(11):819–826. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.07.008.
  19. Helvey G. The expansion of millable materials: new additions to the market increase patient care-options. Inside Dent Technol 2014;5:58–71.
  20. Preis V, Behr M, Hahnel S, et al. Influence of cementation on in vitro performance, marginal adaptation and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM-fabricated ZLS molar crowns. Dental Mater 2015;31(11):1363–1369. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.08.154.
  21. Gomes RS, Souza CM, Bergamo ET, et al. Misfit and fracture load of implant-supported monolithic crowns in zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate. J Appl Oral Sci 2017;25(3):282–289. DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0233.
  22. Abou-Steit S, ElGuindy J, Zaki A. Evaluation of patient satisfaction and shade matching of vita suprinity versus lithium disilicate (E-max) ceramic crowns in the esthetic zone: a randomized controlled clinical trial. F1000 Research 2019;8(371):371. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.18337.1.
  23. Nejatidanesh F, Savabi G, Amjadi M, et al. Five year clinical outcomes and survival of chairside CAD/CAM ceramic laminate veneers—a retrospective study. J Prosthodon Res 2018;62(4):462–467. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2018.05.004.
  24. Karagözoğlu İ, Toksavul S, Toman M. 3D quantification of clinical marginal and internal gap of porcelain laminate veneers with minimal and without tooth preparation and 2-year clinical evaluation. Quintessence Int 2016;47(6):461–471.
  25. Özdemir H, Aladağ Lİ. Effect of different surface treatments on bond strength of different resin cements to lithium disilicate glass ceramic: an in vitro study. Biotechnol Biotechnolog Equip 2017;31(4):815–820. DOI: 10.1080/13102818.2017.1334589.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.