Effect of Luting Cements On the Bond Strength to Turkom-Cera All-Ceramic Material.

BACKGROUND: The selection of the appropriate luting cement is a key factor for achieving a strong bond between prepared teeth and dental restorations. AIM: To evaluate the shear bond strength of Zinc phosphate cement Elite, glass ionomer cement Fuji I, resin-modified glass ionomer cement Fuji Plus and resin luting cement Panavia-F to Turkom-Cera all-ceramic material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Turkom-Cera was used to form discs 10mm in diameter and 3 mm in thickness (n = 40). The ceramic discs were wet ground, air - particle abraded with 50 - µm aluminium oxide particles and randomly divided into four groups (n = 10). The luting cement was bonded to Turkom-Cera discs as per manufacturer instructions. The shear bond strengths were determined using the universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The data were analysed using the tests One Way ANOVA, the nonparametric Kruskal - Wallis test and Mann - Whitney Post hoc test. RESULTS: The shear bond strength of the Elite, Fuji I, Fuji Plus and Panavia F groups were: 0.92 ± 0.42, 2.04 ± 0.78, 4.37 ± 1.18, and 16.42 ± 3.38 MPa, respectively. There was the statistically significant difference between the four luting cement tested (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: the phosphate-containing resin cement Panavia-F exhibited shear bond strength value significantly higher than all materials tested.

Marginal integrity of turkom-cera compared to other all-ceramic materials: effect of finish line.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation of Turkom-Cera all-ceramic crowns compared to In-Ceram and Procera AllCeram systems. The influence of finish line design (chamfer or shoulder) on the marginal adaptation of Turkom-Cera all-ceramic crowns was also investigated. Thirty human premolars were prepared with chamfer margins and assigned to either the Turkom-Cera, In-Ceram, or Procera system group. In addition, 10 premolars were prepared with rounded shoulder finish lines and assigned to an additional Turkom-Cera group. Ceramic copings (0.6-mm thick) were fabricated for each group following the manufacturers' instructions. The copings were seated on abutments using a special holding device that facilitated uniform loading, and marginal adaptation was assessed using a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance, the Tukey HSD post hoc test, and an independent samples t test. There was a statistically significant difference regarding marginal adaptation among the three all-ceramic systems (P < .05). There were no significant differences in the mean marginal discrepancies of Turkom-Cera crowns among chamfer and shoulder finish line groups (P > .05). Within the limitations of this study, the marginal discrepancies were all within the clinically acceptable standard. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24:379-381.

Comparison of the load at fracture of Turkom-Cera to Procera AllCeram and In-Ceram all-ceramic restorations.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the occlusal fracture resistance of Turkom-Cerafused alumina compared to Procera AllCeram and In-Ceram all-ceramic restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixmaster dies were duplicated from the prepared maxillary first premolar tooth using nonprecious metal alloy (Wiron 99). Ten copings of 0.6 mm thickness were fabricated from each type of ceramic, for a total of thirty copings. Two master dies were used for each group, and each of them was used to lute five copings. All groups were cemented with resin luting cement Panavia F according to manufacturer's instructions and received a static load of 5 kg during cementation. After 24 hours of distilled water storage at 37 degrees C, the copings were vertically compressed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. RESULTS: The results of the present study showed the following mean loads at fracture: Turkom-Cera (2184 +/- 164 N), In-Ceram (2042 +/- 200 N), and Procera AllCeram (1954 +/- 211 N). ANOVA and Scheffe's post hoc test showed that the mean load at fracture of Turkom-Cera was significantly different from Procera AllCeram (p < 0.05). Scheffe's post hoc test showed no significant difference between the mean load at fracture of Turkom-Cera and In-Ceram or between the mean load at fracture of In-Ceram and Procera AllCeram. CONCLUSION: Because Turkom-Cera demonstrated equal to or higher loads at fracture than currently accepted all-ceramic materials, it would seem to be acceptable for fabrication of anterior and posterior ceramic crowns.

Effect of luting cements on the compressive strength of Turkom-Cera all-ceramic copings.

AIM: The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of different luting agents on the fracture strength of Turkom-Cera all-ceramic copings. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Standardized metal dies were duplicated from a prepared maxillary first premolar tooth using non-precious metal alloy (Wiron 99). Thirty Turkom-Cera copings of 0.6 mm thickness were then fabricated. Three types of luting agents were used: zinc phosphate cement (Elite), glass-ionomer cement (Fuji I), and a dual-cured composite resin cement (Panavia F). Ten copings were cemented with each type. All copings were cemented to their respective dies according to manufacturer's instructions and received a static load of 5 kg for ten minutes. After 24 hours of storage in distilled water at 37 degrees C, the copings were vertically loaded until fracture using an Instron Universal Testing Machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The mode of fracture was then determined. RESULTS: Statistical analysis carried out using analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant differences in the compressive strength between the three groups (P<0.001). The mean fracture strength (in Newtons) of Turkom-Cera copings cemented with Elite, Fuji I, and Panavia F were 1537.4 N, 1294.4 N, and 2183.6 N, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Luting agents have an influence on the fracture resistance of Turkom-Cera copings.