Background: A reduced residual dentine thickness following crown preparation has a conceivable impact on pulp degeneration by increasing the pulp’s susceptibility to injury. In crown preparations, three different fin...Background: A reduced residual dentine thickness following crown preparation has a conceivable impact on pulp degeneration by increasing the pulp’s susceptibility to injury. In crown preparations, three different finishing lines are used. These are shoulder, chamfer, and knife edge. Each with its comparative advantages and disadvantages. There is inadequate scientific evidence on which of these finishing lines will leave the most amount of residual dentine, after standard crown preparations on mandibular incisors and maxillary lateral incisors to preserve their pulpal health. Objective: To evaluate residual dentine thickness following various cervical finishing lines of anterior crown preparations for zirconia full coverage. Materials and Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted from September 2<sup>nd</sup> to November 5<sup>th</sup>, 2022, using mandibular incisors and maxillary laterals extracted from individuals between ages 18 to 30. Each of the three groups of teeth was randomly divided into three cervical margin preparations as follows: Shoulder (n = 15), chamfer (n = 15), and knife edge (n = 15). The teeth were disinfected and stored in 10% formalin. Silicone impressions followed by crown preparations were done on teeth mounted on phantom head manikins. The teeth were sectioned 0.5 mm coronal to the cemento-enamel junction using a separating disc and the mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual thickness were measured using a digital caliper. ANOVA analysis was applied to assess the difference in mean residual dentine thickness among the finishing lines and the Tukey test used for mean comparison. Results: Knife edge finishing lines had 2.05 mm of residual dentine thickness, for upper lateral incisors lingually and had an amount of 1.55 mm and 1.47 mm for lower central teeth mesially and distally respectively. Shoulder finishing lines had an amount of 0.58 mm for lower lateral incisors mesially. Interproximal areas had the least amounts of residual dentine for shoulder and chamfer finishing lines of 0.58 mm and 0.78 mm respectively. Conclusions: There was a significant statistical difference in the thickness of residual dentine at the various cervical finishing line margins. The knife edge finishing line was protective enough for zirconia crown preparations.展开更多
文摘Background: A reduced residual dentine thickness following crown preparation has a conceivable impact on pulp degeneration by increasing the pulp’s susceptibility to injury. In crown preparations, three different finishing lines are used. These are shoulder, chamfer, and knife edge. Each with its comparative advantages and disadvantages. There is inadequate scientific evidence on which of these finishing lines will leave the most amount of residual dentine, after standard crown preparations on mandibular incisors and maxillary lateral incisors to preserve their pulpal health. Objective: To evaluate residual dentine thickness following various cervical finishing lines of anterior crown preparations for zirconia full coverage. Materials and Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted from September 2<sup>nd</sup> to November 5<sup>th</sup>, 2022, using mandibular incisors and maxillary laterals extracted from individuals between ages 18 to 30. Each of the three groups of teeth was randomly divided into three cervical margin preparations as follows: Shoulder (n = 15), chamfer (n = 15), and knife edge (n = 15). The teeth were disinfected and stored in 10% formalin. Silicone impressions followed by crown preparations were done on teeth mounted on phantom head manikins. The teeth were sectioned 0.5 mm coronal to the cemento-enamel junction using a separating disc and the mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual thickness were measured using a digital caliper. ANOVA analysis was applied to assess the difference in mean residual dentine thickness among the finishing lines and the Tukey test used for mean comparison. Results: Knife edge finishing lines had 2.05 mm of residual dentine thickness, for upper lateral incisors lingually and had an amount of 1.55 mm and 1.47 mm for lower central teeth mesially and distally respectively. Shoulder finishing lines had an amount of 0.58 mm for lower lateral incisors mesially. Interproximal areas had the least amounts of residual dentine for shoulder and chamfer finishing lines of 0.58 mm and 0.78 mm respectively. Conclusions: There was a significant statistical difference in the thickness of residual dentine at the various cervical finishing line margins. The knife edge finishing line was protective enough for zirconia crown preparations.
