Purpose: To evaluate inlay and onlay marginal adaptation of two different ceramic materials using two intracoronal preparation designs. Materials and Methods: An examination of the marginal adaptation of two materials—lithium disilicate (LD; IPS e.max CAD) and polymer infiltrated ceramic network material (PICN; Vita Enamic)—and two preparation designs, where D1 represents MOD inlay preparation with no cusp reduction and for D2, in addition to the basic MOD preparation, the buccal cusps (functional cusps) were reduced by 1.5 mm. Four sub-groups (LD-D1, LD-D2, PICN-D1, PICN-D2) were conducted. In total, 40 (n = 40) mandibular molars were used. A stereomicroscope was used to assess the marginal gap before, after cementation and after thermocycling. Values were calculated for the mean, median, SD, minimum, maximum, and 95% CI. Pairwise comparisons using Tukey post-hoc test were performed following an ANOVA significance of P ≤ .05. Results: The results revealed that lithium disilicate showed statistically significantly higher mean gap distance than PICN material (61 μm to 99 μm). Pairwise comparisons showed that D2 design has statistically significant higher mean gap values than D1. Conclusions: Both LD and PICN material provided marginal adaptation within clinical accepted range. PICN material restorations provided better fit than lithium disilicate restorations. Cusp coverage has a greater marginal gap compared to conventional preparation.
Keywords: Glass Ceramic; Hybrid Ceramic; Marginal gap; Partial coverage.
