In Vitro Comparison of Microleakage, Marginal Fit, and Cement Thickness of Conventional and Prepless Lithium Disilicate Veneers

PURPOSE: To assess the influence of two preparation techniques on the microleakage, marginal fit, and cement thickness of lithium disilicate veneers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 24 human maxillary central incisors were divided randomly into two groups according to preparation technique (n = 12): minimally invasive preparation with butt-joint design (0.3-mm depth) and a chamfer finish line (group MP); and no preparation (NP). All teeth were restored with lithium disilicate veneers cemented with photopolymerizable resin cement. Specimens were aged thermally (6,000 cycles of 5°C to 55°C) and mechanically (100,000 cycles at 100 N, 4 Hz). Specimens were immersed in fuchsin for 24 hours employing a standard dye penetration technique, then sectioned and evaluated under a stereomicroscope (x20). Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests (P < .05). RESULTS: There was significant microleakage (P = .0163) at the cervical area compared to the proximal area. The marginal fit was similar, with no statistical difference (P = .212) between groups MP (153 ± 81 µm) and NP (111 ± 74 µm). Group MP showed a significantly (P = .006) reduced cement thickness at the cervical area (87 ± 27 µm) compared to group NP (210 ± 89 µm). CONCLUSION: Although the preparation technique was shown to influence the cement thickness, it did not show any influence on microleakage or marginal fit.

Abrasion resistance of direct and indirect resins as a function of a sealant veneer.

BACKGROUND: Abrasive wear is one of the most common type of wear that not only affect teeth, as also dental restorations. Thus to investigate one of the etiological factors as tooth brushing procedure is clinical relevant in order to select the best material combination that may prevent damage of resin dental restoration's abrasion. AIMS: This study evaluated the influence of tooth brushing on mass loss and surface roughness of direct Venus (Vs) and indirect Signum (Sg) resin composites, with and without a surface sealant, Fortify (F). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four specimens were prepared with each resin composite, using their proprietary curing units, according to manufacturer's instructions. All the specimens were polished and ultrasonically cleaned in distilled water for 5 minutes. Half of the specimens of each resin (n = 12) were covered with F (Vs F and Sg F ), except for the control (C) specimens (Vs C and Sg C ), which were not sealed. Mass loss (ML) as well as surface roughness (Ra ) was measured for all the specimens. Then, the specimens were subjected to toothbrush-dentifrice abrasion, using a testing machine for 67.000 brushing strokes, in an abrasive slurry. After brushing simulation, the specimens were removed from the holder, rinsed thoroughly and blot dried with soft absorbent paper. The abrasion of the material was quantitatively determined with final measurements of ML and surface roughness, using the method described above. RESULTS: ML data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the analysis indicated that resin composites were not statistically different; however, the specimens sealed with F showed higher ML. Ra mean values of the groups Vs F and Sg F significantly increased. CONCLUSION: Tooth brushing affects mainly the roughness of the direct and indirect resin composites veneered with a sealant.