الفهرس 
DECLARATIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 224 |  |  |
| | | from | 224 | | |
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the gingival inflammatory response
related to ceramo-metallic and zirconia crowns. Bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation on different
crown materials were also evaluated and finally assessment of patient satisfaction was carried out in 3
months period.
Methodology: A total of twenty nonsmokers, medically free patients (age range 21-50 Y) requiring
full-coverage restorations for endodontically treated posterior teeth were selected for the present study.
The patients were divided into two groups according to the crown materials (N=10 patients per each
group): group I (Comparator group) fabricated from ceramo-metallic crowns and group II
(Intervention group) fabricated from Monolithic zirconia crowns (STML MZ). After cementation of the
crowns and after 45 and 90 days of follow up gingival crevicular fluid samples were collected for
Interleukin 1 beta testing and clinical evaluation of gingival and periodontal health were recorded.
While on second day of cementation and after 90 days plaque, saliva swab and spitted saliva samples
were collected for assessment of bacterial count. All data was collected, checked, revised, tabulated and
entered into the computer. Statistical analysis was performed by using Shapiro Wilk and Kolmogorov
tests for normality exploration, Comparison between 2 groups (quantitative) using Mann-Whitney test
and Kruskal-Wallis H test, comparison between 2 groups in follow up by Freidman’s test, while
(qualitative data) was performed by using the Chi square test.
Results: Statistically insignificant difference in the bacterial count between the both tested groups at
base line and after 3 months follow up except for S.sanginius . Concerning the results of interleukin-
1Beta between different groups at different time intervals there were no significant difference. Patients
in both groups were satisfied showing no significant difference.
Conclusions: At the end of the three months follow-up interval, ceramo-metallic crowns and zirconia
ceramic crowns exhibited comparable marginal gingival inflammation as indicated by interleukin -
1beta (IL-1β). Regarding bacterial adhesion and patient satisfaction, it was concluded that there was no
difference between both groups.