RESULTS
fracture, hypersensitivity, tooth vitality
EVENTS, MINOR, PERIODONTAL INFLAMMATION, HYPERSENSITIVITY
A total of 16 participants were examined, but the final sample size consisted of 12 patients and included 72 samples as seen in Figure Consort diagram of the study sample.Table Descriptive and inferential statistical analysis for the research indices during measurement times.1.000 After a week, 1 year0.29 After 3 months0.1 After 3 years0.61 After a week1.000 After 3 months, after 1 year, after 3 yearsWith respect to de‐bonding occurrences, the result of our study showed that there were no de‐bonding events in both groups at all subsequent sessions.A good color match was observed for both of the groups during all measurement intervals, and there was no significant difference between the two groups. There was no fracture or crack in the edges during the measurement times for the two groups, and there was no significant difference between them. Furthermore, it was detected that there were normal contact points during the measurement times for both groups, and there was no significant difference between them. Patients were completely satisfied with the prostheses in both research groups, and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups.With regard to tooth vitality, a minor hypersensitivity was observed in 37.5% of the cases in the zirconia group after a week, in comparison to 43.75% of the cases in the e.max group after a week. However, the vitality was normal for both groups after 3 months, with no significant difference between the two groups during the measurement times. Finally, no periodontal inflammation was detected across the research participants during the measurement times.