Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Pediatr Dent. 2016 Jan-Feb;38(1):42-6.

Comparison of Amount of Primary Tooth Reduction Required for Anterior and Posterior Zirconia and Stainless Steel Crowns.

Author information

1
Private practice, West Memphis, Ark., USA.
2
Graduate Pediatric Dentistry Program, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Community Health, College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tenn., USA. mwells@uthsc.edu.
3
Department of Bioscience Research, College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tenn., USA.
4
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Community Health, College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tenn., USA.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To determine if aggressiveness of primary tooth preparation varied among different brands of zirconia and stainless steel (SSC) crowns.

METHODS:

One hundred primary typodont teeth were divided into five groups (10 posterior and 10 anterior) and assigned to: Cheng Crowns (CC); EZ Pedo (EZP); Kinder Krowns (KKZ); NuSmile (NSZ); and SSC. Teeth were prepared, and assigned crowns were fitted. Teeth were weighed prior to and after preparation. Weight changes served as a surrogate measure of tooth reduction.

RESULTS:

Analysis of variance showed a significant difference in tooth reduction among brand/type for both the anterior and posterior. Tukey's honest significant difference test (HSD), when applied to anterior data, revealed that SSCs required significantly less tooth removal compared to the composite of the four zirconia brands, which showed no significant difference among them. Tukey's HSD test, applied to posterior data, revealed that CC required significantly greater removal of crown structure, while EZP, KKZ, and NSZ were statistically equivalent, and SSCs required significantly less removal.

CONCLUSIONS:

Zirconia crowns required more tooth reduction than stainless steel crowns for primary anterior and posterior teeth. Tooth reduction for anterior zirconia crowns was equivalent among brands. For posterior teeth, reduction for three brands (EZ Pedo, Kinder Krowns, NuSmile) did not differ, while Cheng Crowns required more reduction.

PMID:
26892214
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Ingenta plc
Loading ...
Support Center