الفهرس 
One year clinical evaluation of milled BioHPP biohpp polyetheretherketon (PEEK) versus zirconia Veneered single crowns randomized controlled clinical trial
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 194 |  |  |
| | | from | 194 | | |
Abstract
Aim: To compare the clinical performance of milled BioHPP -based single crowns to zirconia veneered single crowns through evaluation of restoration fracture, margin adaptation, and patient satisfaction. Methodology: Twenty-four full coverage crowns were fabricated for posterior teeth. Scaling and polishing were performed for all the patients one week prior to preparation. The patients were divided into two groups according to crowns{u2019} material: group 1(control group) patients received Zr veneered crowns and Group2 (intervention group) patients received Bio HPP crowns. The preparations were standardized with supra-gingival, chamfer finish line for all teeth. The try-in and provisionalization were performed using CAD/CAM (CAM5-S1) machine with software (Exocad). The restorations were veneered according to manufactures instructions. The restoration surfaces were treated according to the manufacture instructions for each material. Self-adhesive resin cement (by BISCO) was used for both groups for crowns cementation. Fracture, margin integrity and biocompatibility (shade and function) were also evaluated during each recall visit using questionnaire to determine patient satisfaction. These measurements were repeated after two, four, six, eight, ten and twelve months respectively Results: Fisher{u2019}s Exact test was used to compare between the two groups; There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P-value = 1.000, Effect size = 0.478) for each time period, respectively