Evaluation of fracture resistance in aqueous environment of four restorative systems for posterior applications. Part 1

Matilda Dhima, Daniel A. Assad, John E. Volz, Kai Nan An, Lawrence J. Berglund, Alan B. Carr, Thomas J. Salinas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The goals of this study were to: (1) establish a range of the performance of four restorative systems for posterior single-tooth crowns under single load to fracture submerged in an aqueous environment, (2) identify restorative system(s) of interest to be examined in the second study phase under sliding contact step-stress fatigue as full-contour anatomically appropriate single posterior tooth restoration(s), (3) establish a range for loading/testing for phase 2. Materials and Methods: Forty specimens (n = 10/group) of 2 mm uniform thickness were tested. Group 1: monolithic lithium disilicate IPS e.max Press; group 2: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.8 mm zirconia core with 1.2 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 3: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.4 mm zirconia core with 1.6 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 4: IPS InLine PoM. Specimens were bonded to a block of polycast acrylic resin on a 30° sloped surface with resin cement. Specimens were axially single loaded to failure while submerged under water. Results: There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in failure load among the four restorative systems. Lithium disilicate showed a mean failure load similar to mean maximum posterior bite forces (743.1 ± 114.3 N). IPS e.max Zirpress with a 0.4 mm zirconia core exhibited the lowest mean failure load (371.4 ± 123.0 N). Conclusion: Fracture resistance of monolithic lithium disilicate in an aqueous environment is promising and requires second phase testing to evaluate the potential of various thicknesses appropriate for posterior single tooth applications. Doubling the IPS e.max Zirpress zirconia core from 0.4 mm to 0.8 mm increased the fracture resistance of this restorative system threefold.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)256-260
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Prosthodontics
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2013

Fingerprint

Dental Porcelain
Tooth
Tooth Crown
Resin Cements
Bite Force
Acrylic Resins
Fatigue
zirconium oxide
Water
lithia disilicate
IPS e.max Press

Keywords

  • Ceramic
  • Fracture resistance
  • Lithium disilicate
  • Posterior crown
  • Press-on metal
  • Thin zirconia core

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Evaluation of fracture resistance in aqueous environment of four restorative systems for posterior applications. Part 1. / Dhima, Matilda; Assad, Daniel A.; Volz, John E.; An, Kai Nan; Berglund, Lawrence J.; Carr, Alan B.; Salinas, Thomas J.

In: Journal of Prosthodontics, Vol. 22, No. 4, 06.2013, p. 256-260.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dhima, Matilda ; Assad, Daniel A. ; Volz, John E. ; An, Kai Nan ; Berglund, Lawrence J. ; Carr, Alan B. ; Salinas, Thomas J. / Evaluation of fracture resistance in aqueous environment of four restorative systems for posterior applications. Part 1. In: Journal of Prosthodontics. 2013 ; Vol. 22, No. 4. pp. 256-260.
@article{37429bc0c13142edbbccf8a228d2d75d,
title = "Evaluation of fracture resistance in aqueous environment of four restorative systems for posterior applications. Part 1",
abstract = "Purpose: The goals of this study were to: (1) establish a range of the performance of four restorative systems for posterior single-tooth crowns under single load to fracture submerged in an aqueous environment, (2) identify restorative system(s) of interest to be examined in the second study phase under sliding contact step-stress fatigue as full-contour anatomically appropriate single posterior tooth restoration(s), (3) establish a range for loading/testing for phase 2. Materials and Methods: Forty specimens (n = 10/group) of 2 mm uniform thickness were tested. Group 1: monolithic lithium disilicate IPS e.max Press; group 2: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.8 mm zirconia core with 1.2 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 3: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.4 mm zirconia core with 1.6 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 4: IPS InLine PoM. Specimens were bonded to a block of polycast acrylic resin on a 30° sloped surface with resin cement. Specimens were axially single loaded to failure while submerged under water. Results: There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in failure load among the four restorative systems. Lithium disilicate showed a mean failure load similar to mean maximum posterior bite forces (743.1 ± 114.3 N). IPS e.max Zirpress with a 0.4 mm zirconia core exhibited the lowest mean failure load (371.4 ± 123.0 N). Conclusion: Fracture resistance of monolithic lithium disilicate in an aqueous environment is promising and requires second phase testing to evaluate the potential of various thicknesses appropriate for posterior single tooth applications. Doubling the IPS e.max Zirpress zirconia core from 0.4 mm to 0.8 mm increased the fracture resistance of this restorative system threefold.",
keywords = "Ceramic, Fracture resistance, Lithium disilicate, Posterior crown, Press-on metal, Thin zirconia core",
author = "Matilda Dhima and Assad, {Daniel A.} and Volz, {John E.} and An, {Kai Nan} and Berglund, {Lawrence J.} and Carr, {Alan B.} and Salinas, {Thomas J.}",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00948.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "256--260",
journal = "Journal of Prosthodontics",
issn = "1059-941X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of fracture resistance in aqueous environment of four restorative systems for posterior applications. Part 1

AU - Dhima, Matilda

AU - Assad, Daniel A.

AU - Volz, John E.

AU - An, Kai Nan

AU - Berglund, Lawrence J.

AU - Carr, Alan B.

AU - Salinas, Thomas J.

PY - 2013/6

Y1 - 2013/6

N2 - Purpose: The goals of this study were to: (1) establish a range of the performance of four restorative systems for posterior single-tooth crowns under single load to fracture submerged in an aqueous environment, (2) identify restorative system(s) of interest to be examined in the second study phase under sliding contact step-stress fatigue as full-contour anatomically appropriate single posterior tooth restoration(s), (3) establish a range for loading/testing for phase 2. Materials and Methods: Forty specimens (n = 10/group) of 2 mm uniform thickness were tested. Group 1: monolithic lithium disilicate IPS e.max Press; group 2: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.8 mm zirconia core with 1.2 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 3: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.4 mm zirconia core with 1.6 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 4: IPS InLine PoM. Specimens were bonded to a block of polycast acrylic resin on a 30° sloped surface with resin cement. Specimens were axially single loaded to failure while submerged under water. Results: There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in failure load among the four restorative systems. Lithium disilicate showed a mean failure load similar to mean maximum posterior bite forces (743.1 ± 114.3 N). IPS e.max Zirpress with a 0.4 mm zirconia core exhibited the lowest mean failure load (371.4 ± 123.0 N). Conclusion: Fracture resistance of monolithic lithium disilicate in an aqueous environment is promising and requires second phase testing to evaluate the potential of various thicknesses appropriate for posterior single tooth applications. Doubling the IPS e.max Zirpress zirconia core from 0.4 mm to 0.8 mm increased the fracture resistance of this restorative system threefold.

AB - Purpose: The goals of this study were to: (1) establish a range of the performance of four restorative systems for posterior single-tooth crowns under single load to fracture submerged in an aqueous environment, (2) identify restorative system(s) of interest to be examined in the second study phase under sliding contact step-stress fatigue as full-contour anatomically appropriate single posterior tooth restoration(s), (3) establish a range for loading/testing for phase 2. Materials and Methods: Forty specimens (n = 10/group) of 2 mm uniform thickness were tested. Group 1: monolithic lithium disilicate IPS e.max Press; group 2: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.8 mm zirconia core with 1.2 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 3: IPS e.max ZirPress, 0.4 mm zirconia core with 1.6 mm pressed veneering porcelain; group 4: IPS InLine PoM. Specimens were bonded to a block of polycast acrylic resin on a 30° sloped surface with resin cement. Specimens were axially single loaded to failure while submerged under water. Results: There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in failure load among the four restorative systems. Lithium disilicate showed a mean failure load similar to mean maximum posterior bite forces (743.1 ± 114.3 N). IPS e.max Zirpress with a 0.4 mm zirconia core exhibited the lowest mean failure load (371.4 ± 123.0 N). Conclusion: Fracture resistance of monolithic lithium disilicate in an aqueous environment is promising and requires second phase testing to evaluate the potential of various thicknesses appropriate for posterior single tooth applications. Doubling the IPS e.max Zirpress zirconia core from 0.4 mm to 0.8 mm increased the fracture resistance of this restorative system threefold.

KW - Ceramic

KW - Fracture resistance

KW - Lithium disilicate

KW - Posterior crown

KW - Press-on metal

KW - Thin zirconia core

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879695829&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879695829&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00948.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00948.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 23279080

AN - SCOPUS:84879695829

VL - 22

SP - 256

EP - 260

JO - Journal of Prosthodontics

JF - Journal of Prosthodontics

SN - 1059-941X

IS - 4

ER -