الفهرس 
Patient satisfaction and clinical assessment of Bio HPP crown veneered with Visio.lign compared to Lithium disilicate (E-max) crown veneered with E- max veneering system in Anterior Aesthetic zone. (Randomized controlled clinical trial)
List of ContentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 202 |  |  |
| | | from | 202 | | |
Abstract
This clinical study was performed in order to evaluate patient satisfaction and esthetic clinical performance of Bio HPP versus lithium disilicate (e-max) all ceramic crowns in esthetic zone. Twenty-four full coverage restorations (Twenty in each group) were fabricated for teeth requiring full coverage restorations in esthetic zone. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of ceramic used. group I (control group) IPS e.max press coping veneered with IPS e-max Ceram ceramic crowns. group II (intervention group) Bio HPP coping veneered with Visio.Lign veneering composite.The color of the tooth was recorded visually using VITA 3D-master shade guide system in accordance to the contralateral/ adjacent tooth under different light conditions: natural day light, incandescent light and color corrected light to avoid metamerism with the help of three prosthodontists that performed Ishihara’s test to determine color deficiency. Shade was also confirmed with Vita Easy shade V spectrophotometer.The shade of the prepared abutment tooth was recorded visually using the IPS Natural Die Material shade guide. In order to fabricate a die mimicking the oral situation for optimum desired final esthetic results.The fabrication of the crowns was performed using press coping and free hand layering technique.The fitting surfaces of the crowns were treated according to the manufacturer’s instruction and abutment teeth cemented with self adhesive Rely XU200 resin cement. Patient satisfaction was evaluated according to the Rating score while esthetic clinical assessment (shade match, surface texture and marginal discoloration) was evaluated according to modified United States Public Health Services (USPHS) criteria. Patient satisfaction results: There was no statistically significant difference among time between the two groups. At T0 & T3: Ten restorations of Bio HPP group showed (83.3%) Excellent score, while two restorations showed (16.7%) Good score