The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate ceramic laminate veneers constructed from Lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD), and resin nano-ceramic (Lava Ultimate TM CAD/CAM) according to the modified United States of Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria over 12 months. Materials and methods: Twenty-eight ceramic laminate veneers (fourteen for each group) were placed in the Fixed Prosthodontics Department clinics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University by one operator. The restorations were made using CEREC premium 4.4 CAD/CAM software with IPS e.max CAD and Lava Ultimate TM CAD/CAM blocks. Modified USPHS criteria were used to evaluate the clinical performance of the restorations. Patient satisfaction were assessed using visual analogue scale. Fisher's Exact test was used to compare between the two groups. Friedman's test was used to study the changes by time in each group. Patient satisfaction scores (VAS scores) were presented as median and range values.Results: Regrading marginal adaptation, retention, and fracture, through the whole study period; all restorations in the two groups showed (Alpha) scores. While for marginal discoloration, all surfaces of restorations in the two groups showed (Alpha) scores till 6 months. While after 8, 10 and 12 months; the palatal surface of Lava Ultimate group showed (Bravo) scores. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups after 12 months (P-value = 0.481). The overall satisfaction of restorations was very satisfied by 85.7% and satisfied by 14.3%. Conclusion:Both IPS e.max CAD and Lava Ultimate laminate veneers revealed high successful clinical performance over a period of 12 months follow up.

Objective: To evaluate the clinical behavior of milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with Visio.lign composite resin in comparison with metal copings veneered with feldspathic porcelain as single posterior crowns. Material and Methods: Twenty Four full coverage posterior crowns were fabricated for endodontically treated molars divided into 2 groups according to the material used. Twelve milled BioHPP PEEK-based crowns (Group 1) and Twelve Porcelain Fused to Metal (PFM) crowns (Group 2). The preparations were standardized with an equi-gingival, deep chamfer finish line for all teeth. BioHPP PEEK and metal copings were fabricated by CAD/CAM technology and lost wax technique respectively. These coping were veneered according to manufactures instructions either by special composite resin or low fusing glass ceramic respectively. The restorations were cemented then clinical evaluation of these crowns was assessed regarding mechanical failure, marginal integrity and patient satisfaction every two months for one year. Results: Although two PEEK crowns were fractured, both PEEK and PFM crowns showed similar fracture (mechanical failure) and marginal integrity without significant difference (P > 0.05). BioHPP PEEK-based crowns showed statistically significantly lower patient satisfaction than PFM crowns after six months (P-value = 0.013, Effect size = 1.157) but all the patients were generally satisfied. Conclusion: BioHPP PEEK-based crowns showed clinically similar and accepted mechanical behavior and marginal integrity but less patient’s satisfaction than PFM crowns after six months. So BioHPP PEEK-based crowns may be used as an alternative tooth-colored metal-free fixed restoration for one year.   Keywords  BioHPP; Metal ceramic; Patient satisfaction; PEEK; PFM.