Soliman, MaiAlzahrani, GhadeerAlabdualataif, FotonEldwakhly, ElzahraaAlsamady, SaharAldegheishem, AlhanoofAbdelhafeez, Manal M2022-09-252022-09-252022-08https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15165592http://repository.msa.edu.eg/xmlui/handle/123456789/5193ScopusBackground: The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of ceramic material and preparation design on the marginal fit of endocrown restorations. Methods: Forty endocrown restorations were CAD/CAM-fabricated for forty extracted maxillary first premolar teeth. Samples were divided into two groups (n = 20) according to the ceramic materials used: Celtra Duo and Vita Enamic. Each group was divided into two subgroups (n = 10) according to the preparation design: with no intraradicular extension and with 3 mm intraradicular extension. The marginal gap was examined using a digital microscope. Results: Celtra Duo without intraradicular extension recorded the least mean marginal gap (7.74 ± 1.55 µm), while Group Celtra Duo with 3 mm intraradicular extension recorded the highest mean marginal gap (29.54 ± 6.32 µm). Group Vita Enamic recorded a lesser marginal gap (18.03 ± 12.11 µm) than group CD (Celtra Duo) (18.64 ± 12.05 µm). There is a statistically non-significant difference between the two groups of materials (p = 0.873). There is a statistically significant difference between the two tested preparation designs (p < 0.001). Conclusion: All groups recorded a marginal gap within clinically accepted values. Material selection may influence the fitting of restorations. Intraradicular extension for endocrown restorations adversely affects the marginal fit, however, the marginal gap is still within the clinically accepted range.en-USendocrownmarginal gapceltra duoenamicintraradicular extensionpreparation designArticlehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ma15165592