Skip to content

Clinical Performance of Ceramic CAD/CAM Crowns

Clinical Performance of Monolithic Lithium-disilicate Glass-Ceramic CAD/CAM Crowns

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03921307
Enrollment
251
Registered
2019-04-19
Start date
2017-05-15
Completion date
2018-12-21
Last updated
2019-04-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Dental Caries, Tooth Crown Fracture

Keywords

Computer-Aided Design, dental crowns, survival

Brief summary

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of laboratory and chairside fabricated monolithic anterior and posterior LDGC CAD/CAM crowns performed by predoctoral students at the University of Toronto and the effect of different patient and provider-related factors on their longevity and to compare them to the metal-ceramic (MC) crowns. A sample of LDGC CAD/CAM crowns (IPS e.max, Ivoclar Vivadent) provided by predoctoral students was evaluated. Crown preparations were made according to the specific criteria and were milled in-house using the CEREC bluecam and Omnicam systems. Crowns were cemented with Rely-X Unicem (3M/ESPE) and Calibra Universal (Dentsply Sirona) resin cements. Clinical assessment of the crowns and supporting periodontal structures was performed following the modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria. Intra-oral photographs, periapical and bitewing radiographs were taken for further assessment by two evaluators. Two-hundred and fifty-one patients with 275 crowns were examined with a follow-up period of up to 6 years.

Detailed description

The clinical success of the monolithic Lithium-disilicate Glass-ceramic (LDGC) crowns manufactured with computer-aided design (CAD) / computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) technology provided by predoctoral students was not investigated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of laboratory and chairside fabricated monolithic anterior and posterior LDGC CAD/CAM crowns performed by predoctoral students at the University of Toronto and the effect of different patient and provider-related factors on their longevity and to compare them to the metal-ceramic (MC) crowns. A sample of LDGC CAD/CAM crowns (IPS e.max, Ivoclar Vivadent) provided by predoctoral students was evaluated. Crown preparations were made according to the specific criteria and were milled in-house using the CEREC bluecam and Omnicam systems. Crowns were cemented with Rely-X Unicem (3M/ESPE) and Calibra Universal (Dentsply Sirona) resin cements. Clinical assessment of the crowns and supporting periodontal structures was performed following the modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria. Intra-oral photographs, periapical and bitewing radiographs were taken for further assessment by two evaluators. Two-hundred and fifty-one patients with 275 crowns were examined with a follow-up period of up to 6 years. Part 1 evaluated the performance of laboratory-fabricated LDGC CAD/CAM crowns. Part 2 evaluated the performance of chairside LDGC CAD/CAM crowns. Forty crowns were evaluated. Part 3 evaluated the performance of LDGC CAD/CAM and MC crowns using split-mouth design. A total of 25 patients and 50 crowns (25 crowns for each group) were examined.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

University of Toronto
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
RETROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Healthy periodontal tissue Adequate root canal treatment

Exclusion criteria

* Parafunctional habits

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Survival percentage6 yearsKaplan Meier analysis of survival of the crowns
Clinical performance of crowns via modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria6 yearsBiological complications: pulpal involvement, recurrent caries, tooth fracture. Technical complications: marginal integrity (slight marginal discrepancy, open margins, marginal overhang, under-contoured margins), loss of retention, crown fracture, chipping/crack lines, open proximal contact. Esthetic complications: surface texture/smoothness, color match/mismatch, marginal discoloration, over or under-contoured.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Patient satisfaction with esthetic and function of crowns6 yearsUsing Visual Analog Scale (VAS)

Countries

Canada

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026