Comparative Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation and Fracture Strength of Different Ceramic Inlays Produced by CEREC Omnicam and Heat-Pressed Technique

Table 2

Cross table and comparison of different surfaces marginal gap results.

	EC				LU				EL				EP
	IPS e.max CAD				Lava Ultimate				IPS Empress CAD				IPS Empress Esthetic
	CEREC Omnicam				CEREC Omnicam				CEREC Omnicam				CEREC Omnicam
	Mesial	Distal	Occlusobuccal	Occlusolingual	Mesial	Distal	Occlusobuccal	Occluso lingual	Mesial	Distal	Occlusobuccal	Occlusolingual	Mesial	Distal	Occlusobuccal	Occlusolingual
Mesial	—	0.696	0.608	0.589	—	0.439	0.008^s	0.001^s	—	0.537	0.438	0.379	—	0.526	0.564	0.260
Distal	0.696	—	0.907	0.910	0.439	—	0.004^s	0.001^s	0.669	—	0.715	0.744	0.526	—	0.875	0.597
Occlusobuccal	0.608	0.907	—	0.990	0.008^s	0.004^s	—	0.713	0.622	0.652	—	0.538	0.564	0.875	—	0.300
Occlusolingual	0.589	0.910	0.990	—	0.001^s	0.001^s	0.713	—	0.511	0.685	0.687	—	0.260	0.597	0.300	—

Values with the “s” letter are significantly different according to the Mann–Whitney U analysis. ().