ABSTRACT
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Preparation designs and ceramic thicknesses are key factors for the long-term success of minimally invasive premolar partial coverage restorations. However, only limited information is presently available on this topic. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the fracture resistance and failure modes of ceramic premolar partial coverage restorations with different preparation designs and ceramic thicknesses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Caries-free human premolars (n=144) were divided into 9 groups. Palatal onlay preparation comprised reduction of the palatal cusp by 2 mm (Palatal Onlay Standard), 1 mm (Palatal-Onlay-Thin), or 0.5 mm (Palatal Onlay Ultrathin). Complete-coverage onlay preparation additionally included the buccal cusp (Occlusal Onlay Standard; Occlusal Onlay Thin; Occlusal Onlay Ultrathin). Labial surface preparations with chamfer reductions of 0.8 mm (Complete-Veneer-Standard), 0.6 mm (Complete-Veneer-Thin), and 0.4 mm (Complete Veneer Ultrathin) were implemented for complete veneer restorations. Restorations were fabricated from a pressable lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max-Press) and cemented adhesively (Syntac-Classic/Variolink-II). All specimens were subjected to cyclic mechanical loading (F=49 N, 1.2 million cycles) and simultaneous thermocycling (5°C to 55°C) in a mouth-motion simulator. After fatigue, restorations were exposed to single-load-to-failure. Two-way ANOVA was used to identify statistical differences. Pair-wise differences were calculated and P-values were adjusted by the Tukey-Kramer method (α=.05). RESULTS: All specimens survived fatigue. Mean (SD) load to failure values (N) were as follows: 837 (320/Palatal-Onlay-Standard), 1055 (369/Palatal-Onlay-Thin), 1192 (342/Palatal-Onlay-Ultrathin), 963 (405/Occlusal-Onlay-Standard), 1108 (340/Occlusal-Onlay-Thin), 997 (331/Occlusal-Onlay-Ultrathin), 1361 (333/Complete-Veneer-Standard), 1087 (251/Complete-Veneer-Thin), 883 (311/Complete-Veneer-Ultrathin). Palatal-onlay restorations revealed a significantly higher fracture resistance with ultrathin thicknesses than with standard thicknesses (P=.015). Onlay restorations were not affected by thickness variations. Fracture loads of standard complete veneers were significantly higher than thin (P=.03) and ultrathin (P<.001) restorations. CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro study, the reduction of preparation depth to 1.00 and 0.5 mm did not impair fracture resistance of pressable lithium-disilicate ceramic onlay restorations but resulted in lower failure loads in complete veneer restorations on premolars.
Subject(s)
Bicuspid , Dental Porcelain/chemistry , Dental Prosthesis Design , Dental Restoration Failure , Inlays , Acid Etching, Dental/methods , Bite Force , Cementation/methods , Ceramics/chemistry , Dental Stress Analysis/instrumentation , Dental Veneers , Humans , Materials Testing , Phosphoric Acids/chemistry , Resin Cements/chemistry , Surface Properties , Temperature , Time Factors , Tooth Preparation, Prosthodontic/methodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The authors analyzed the effect of fatigue on the survival rate and fracture load of monolithic and bi-layer CAD/CAM lithium-disilicate posterior three-unit fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) in comparison to the metal-ceramic gold standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors divided 96 human premolars and molars into three equal groups. Lithium-disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max-CAD) was milled with the CEREC-3-system in full-anatomic FDP dimensions (monolithic: M-LiCAD) or as framework (Bi-layer: BL-LiCAD) with subsequent hand-layer veneering. Metal-ceramic FDPs (MC) served as control. Single-load-to-failure tests were performed before and after mouth-motion fatigue. RESULTS: No fracture failures occurred during fatigue. Median fracture loads in [N], before and after fatigue were, respectively, as follows: M-LiCAD, 1,298/1,900; BL-LiCAD, 817/699; MC, 1,966/1,818. M-LiCAD and MC FPDs revealed comparable fracture loads and were both significantly higher than BL-LiCAD. M-LiCAD and BL-LiCAD both failed from core/veneer bulk fracture within the connector area. MC failures were limited to ceramic veneer fractures exposing the metal core. Fatigue had no significant effect on any group. CONCLUSIONS: Posterior monolithic CAD/CAM fabricated lithium-disilicate FPDs were shown to be fracture resistant with failure load results comparable to the metal-ceramic gold standard. Clinical investigations are needed to confirm these promising laboratory results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Monolithic CAD/CAM fabricated lithium-disilicate FDPs appeared to be a reliable treatment alternative for the posterior load-bearing area, whereas FDPs in bi-layer configuration were susceptible to low load fracture failure.
Subject(s)
Computer-Aided Design , Dental Porcelain , Dental Restoration Failure , Denture Design , Denture, Partial, Fixed , Metal Ceramic Alloys , Aluminum Silicates , Dental Bonding , Dental Cements , Dental Stress Analysis , Dental Veneers , Humans , Materials Testing , Statistics, NonparametricABSTRACT
Several all-ceramic systems have been developed in dentistry to meet the increased expectations of patients and dentists for highly aesthetic, biocompatible, and long-lasting restorations. However, early bulk fractures or chippings have led the research community to investigate the mechanical performance of the all-ceramic systems. This overview explores the current knowledge of monolithic and bilayer dental all-ceramic systems, addressing composition and processing mechanisms, laboratory and clinical performance, and possible future trends for all-ceramic materials.
