Statement of the Problem: Full-coverage all-ceramic restorations are widely used. The impact of various classifications of luting agent on marginal discrepancies is not well understood. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cervical fit of all ceramic crowns (IPS e.maxPress, Cergogold, and In Ceram) on bovine teeth with two luting agents before and after cementation. Materials and Methods: Ninety bovine incisors were embedded in resin. The coronal portions of the teeth were prepared to receive full-coverage crowns. Thirty crowns of 7.0 +/- 0.5 mm height, 8.0 mm cervical diameter, and 4.2 mm incisal diameter were fabricated for each ceramic system. The crowns were seated on the teeth, and the marginal discrepancy was measured using a measuring microscope. Then, 15 crowns of each ceramic system were luted on the teeth with resin cement (Variolink II) or resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Rely X luting), and the marginal discrepancy was measured. The results were submitted to analysis of variance, t test and Tukey's test (p<0.05). Results: The three ceramic systems showed cervical fits after cementation statistically inferior to cervical fits before cementation for the two cements. The IPS e.maxPress showed values for cervical fit statistically superior to Cergogold before cementation. No statistically significant difference was found between IPS e.maxPress and In Ceram and In Ceram and Cergogold. After cementation, no statistically significant difference was found for the three ceramics systems when luted with resin or resin-modified glass ionomer luting agents. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that both cements studied increase the marginal discrepancy between the crown and the preparation for the three ceramic systems evaluated.376641649University of Uberaba, Brazil