The introduction of new techniques combining digital workflow with dentistry has led to the development of new materials and new ways of producing and processing them. This is the case with lithium disilicate, a relatively new material in the history of dental prosthetics which for a long time was produced using the pressing technique and which today is gaining in popularity using the milling technique. The aim of this study was to compare Pressed Lithium Disilicate and Milled Lithium Disilicate being monolithic or veneered among two parts.: flexural strength and marginal fit. The method proposes a global transversal review of the different studies that have analyzed the different materials, comparing them among themselves when possible, by means of scientific literature analysis. Many results are available today, often contradictory, not allowing to establish one technique superior to another but Regardless of this, the average variance between the Emax CAD or Emax press restorations assessed in this critical review was within the clinically acceptable range. This investigation revealed similar mechanical properties between E.max CAD and E.max Press being both totally clinically acceptable. If one should choose between one and the other, one should base his choice on other aspects. A highlight that showed up of this investigation is more than the material itself, it is the workflow and the importance of the human influence during the process that matters. Regarding human influence, the more steps, the higher the risk of variability in the result increase. Regarding workflow, the CAD CAM experience offer a simpler working procedure. In the years to come, intraoral scanner will become more and more effective and widespread as they become more affordable. One can imagine that the CAD CAM procedure will overcome the use of Press system.

Universidad Europea de Madrid

Grado en Odontología

Presencial