الفهرس 
One year clinical evaluation of pressed biohpp polyetheretherketone (peek)-based versus zirconia-based single crowns : (Randomized controlled clinical trial)
ABSTRACTOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 215 |  |  |
| | | from | 215 | | |
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the clinical behavior of Pressed BioHPP PEEK single crowns veneered with composite resin in comparison with Zirconia single crowns veneered with porcelain.
Methodology: 24 full coverage posterior crowns were fabricated for endodontically treated molars divided into 2 groups according to the material used. 12 pressed BioHPP PEEK-based crowns (group A) and 12 Zirconia (Zr) crowns (group B). Standardization was applied to the preparations using equi- gingival, deep chamfer finish line for all teeth. BioHPP PEEK and Zirconia copings were fabricated by Pressing technique and CAD/CAM technology respectively. These copings were veneered according to manufactures’ instructions by Visio.lign composite resin and Nano-fluroapatite glass ceramic respectively. The crowns were cemented then clinically assessed regarding mechanical failure, marginal integrity and patient satisfaction every 2 months for 1 year.
Results: Although 1 PEEK crown was fractured, both PEEK and Zr crowns showed similar mechanical failure and marginal integrity without significant difference (P > 0.05). BioHPP PEEK-based crowns showed statistically significantly lower patient satisfaction than Zr crowns (P-value = 0.037, Effect size
= 0.937) but all the patients were generally satisfied.
Conclusions: BioHPP PEEK-based crowns showed clinically similar and accepted mechanical behavior and marginal integrity but less patient’s satisfaction than Zirconia-based crowns after 8 months. Therefore, BioHPP PEEK-based crowns may be used as an alternative tooth-colored metal-free fixed restoration