Fatigue Behavior of Different CAD/CAM Materials for Monolithic, Implant‐Supported Molar Crowns

Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles; Carneiro, Rafael Corrêa; Francischone, Carlos Eduardo; Assis, Neuza Maria Souza Picorelli; Devito, Karina Lopes; Senna, Plínio Mendes

doi:10.1111/jopr.12922

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, silicone fit checker was used on the intaglio surface to further confirm the internal fit. If the crown was found to be of satisfactory fit, it was selected for cementation on individual dies [ 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ]. Thirty-one crowns satisfied the criteria for marginal and internal fit, whereas one Zi crown was newly fabricated, as it did not meet the required criteria.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fracture load value was recorded with the relevant software, and the first drop was marked as corresponding load at failure. The maximum load necessary to fracture each specimen was recorded in Newtons (N) [ 42 , 44 , 58 ]. The mode of failure of crowns was recorded according to a classification method [ 58 , 59 ] as follows: Type I: minimal fracture or crack in the crown.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of Marginal/Internal Fit and Fracture Load of Monolithic Zirconia and Zirconia Lithium Silicate (ZLS) CAD/CAM Crown Systems

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fit accuracy and fracture strength of milled monolithic zirconia (Zi) and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) crowns are important parameters determining the success of these restorations. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the marginal and internal fit of monolithic Zi and ZLS crowns, along with the fracture load, with and without mechanical aging. Thirty-two stone dies acquired from a customized master metal molar die were scanned, and ceramic crowns (16 Zi Ceramill Zolid HT+ and 16 ZLS Vita Suprinity) were designed and milled. Absolute marginal discrepancies (AMD), marginal gaps (MG), and internal gaps (IG) of the crowns, in relation to the master metal die, were evaluated using x-ray nanotomography (n = 16). Next, thirty-two metal dies were fabricated based on the master metal die, and crowns (16 Zi; 16 ZLS) cemented and divided into four groups of eight each; eight Zi with mechanical aging (MA), eight Zi without mechanical aging (WMA), eight ZLS (MA), and eight ZLS (WMA). Two groups of crowns (Zi-MA; ZLS-MA) were subjected to 500,000 mechanical cycles (200 ± 50 N, 10 Hz) followed by axial compressive strength testing of all crowns, until failure, and the values were recorded. Independent sample t tests (α = 0.05) revealed no significant differences between Zi and ZLS crowns (p > 0.05); for both internal and marginal gaps, however, there were significant differences in AMD (p < 0.005). Independent samples Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests revealed significant differences between the two materials, Zi and ZLS, regardless of fatigue loading, and for the individual material groups based on aging (α = 0.05). Multiple comparisons using Bonferroni post-hoc analysis showed significant differences between Zi and ZLS material groups, with or without aging. Within the limitations of this study, the ZLS crown fit was found to be on par with Zi, except for the AMD parameter. As regards fracture resistance, both materials survived the normal range of masticatory forces, but the Zi crowns demonstrated greater resistance to fracture. The monolithic Zi and ZLS crowns seem suitable for clinical application, based on the fit and fracture strength values obtained.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Marginal/Internal Fit and Fracture Load of Monolithic Zirconia and Zirconia Lithium Silicate (ZLS) CAD/CAM Crown Systems

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other published in vitro studies compared the fracture resistance after thermomechanical loading of various CAD/CAM materials on molars. Investigated cemented ISSC were: feldspathic (VITA Mark II: 1130 ± 220N), resin‐matrix ceramic (Lava Ultimate: 2490 ± 510N), LDS (IPS e.max CAD: 2645 ± 545N) (45 N, 1.2 million cycles); 15 feldspathic (Cerec Blocs: 2147 ± 412N), resin‐matrix ceramic (Lava Ultimate:1755 ± 124N) and LDS (IPS e.max CAD: 2804 ± 303 N) (250 N, 1 million cycles) 17 . For screw‐retained ISSC fracture loads after 1.2 million chewing cycles with 50N at 1.6 Hz and thermal cycling (5‐55°C) of lithium silicate ceramic (Celtra Duo: 2302 ± 798N), resin‐matrix ceramic (Cerasmart: 977 ± 129N), LDS (IPS e.max CAD: 3070 ± 376N) and polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network (Enamic: 1750 ± 277N) were recorded 44 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In vitro studies with applied fatigue tests and accelerated aging protocols can predict lifetime estimations and potential sources of failure of all‐ceramic restorations. So far, only a few studies tested cemented LDS ISSC in the molar region under laboratory conditions with fatigue application 15–17 . However, a current trend toward screw‐retention, especially for single‐unit restorations can be observed, as these have fewer biological complications than cemented solutions and allow easier access in case of technical complications 18–21 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure Load of Monolithic Lithium Disilicate Implant‐Supported Single Crowns Bonded to Ti‐base Abutments versus to Customized Ceramic Abutments after Fatigue

Spitznagel

Bonfante

Vollmer

et al. 2021

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This laboratory study analyzed the influence of retention mode (screw‐ vs cement retained) and fatigue application on the failure load of monolithic lithium‐disilicate (LDS) implant‐supported single crowns (ISSC). Material and Methods A total of 72 samples of monolithic LDS (*Ivoclar Vivadent) ISSC were divided into three groups (n = 24) according to their type of retention mode: Group Ti‐CAD: Titanium base (SICvantage CAD/CAM Abutment red (SIC invent AG), screw‐retained milled monolithic LDS (IPS e.max CAD*); Group Ti‐P: Titanium base (SICvantage CAD/CAM Abutment red), screw‐retained pressed monolithic LDS (IPS e.max Press*) and Group Ti‐Cust: Titanium base with cemented press LDS (IPS e.max Press*) crown on a LDS (IPS e.max Press*) custom abutment. A mandibular first molar implant‐supported single crown model was investigated (Titanium implant: SICvantage‐max, SIC invent AG, diameter: 4.2 mm, length: 11.5 mm). Half of each group (n = 12) were exposed to fatigue with cyclic mechanical loading (F = 198 N, 1.2 million cycles) and simultaneous thermocycling (5‐55°C). Single load to failure testing was performed, before (Subgroups Ti‐CAD, Ti‐P, and Ti‐Cust) and after (Subgroups Ti‐CAD‐F, Ti‐P‐F, and Ti‐Cust‐F) fatigue. Weibull distribution was used to determine the characteristic strength and Weibull modulus differences between groups. Probability of survival at 900N load was calculated. Results No samples failed during fatigue. Characteristic strength values were as follow: Ti‐CAD: 3259.5N, Ti‐CAD‐F: 2926N, Ti‐P: 2763N, Ti‐P‐F: 2841N, Ti‐Cust: 2789N, Ti‐Cust‐F: 2194N. Whereas no difference was observed between pressed or milled monolithic crowns cemented to Ti‐base, regardless of loading condition, fatigue decreased the characteristic strength of crowns cemented to custom abutments. Probability of survival at 900 N was not significantly different between groups. Conclusions Screw‐retained pressed or milled monolithic LDS ISSC, cemented directly to Ti‐base abutments or LDS crowns cemented to custom ceramic abutments resist physiological chewing forces after simulated 5‐year aging in the artificial mouth and presented equally high probability of survival. However, a significant decrease in load to failure was observed in LDS crowns cemented to custom ceramic abutments after fatigue. Prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm the results of this laboratory investigation.

show abstract

“…Fatigue behaviors are important for the clinical long-term prognosis of prosthodontic restorative materials. The results of several studies have shown that SM-based monolithic LS2 implant-supported single crowns survived after dynamic loading, thermocycling, and aging [121][122][123][124]. The full anatomical e.max CAD crowns prepared in monolithic form provide fatigue resistance by increasing the mechanical stability, which is enabled by the ability of a single-piece structure to withstand higher forces.…”

Section: Lithium Disilicate Glassmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ceramic Materials and Technologies Applied to Digital Works in Implant-Supported Restorative Dentistry

Pyo

Kim²,

Han

et al. 2020

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer-aided design and manufacturing technology has been closely associated with implant-supported restoration. The digital system employed for prosthodontic restorations comprises data acquisition, processing, and manufacturing using subtractive or additive methods. As digital implantology has developed, optical scanning, computer-based digital algorithms, fabricating techniques, and numerical control skills have all rapidly improved in terms of their accuracy, which has resulted in the development of new ceramic materials with advanced esthetics and durability for clinical application. This study reviews the application of digital technology in implant-supported dental restoration and explores two globally utilized ceramic restorative materials: Yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline and lithium disilicate glass ceramics.

show abstract

Fatigue Behavior of Different CAD/CAM Materials for Monolithic, Implant‐Supported Molar Crowns

Abstract: It was possible to conclude that all of the tested CAD/CAM materials can be used as monolithic, implant-supported molar crowns.

Cited by 6 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of Marginal/Internal Fit and Fracture Load of Monolithic Zirconia and Zirconia Lithium Silicate (ZLS) CAD/CAM Crown Systems

Evaluation of Marginal/Internal Fit and Fracture Load of Monolithic Zirconia and Zirconia Lithium Silicate (ZLS) CAD/CAM Crown Systems

Failure Load of Monolithic Lithium Disilicate Implant‐Supported Single Crowns Bonded to Ti‐base Abutments versus to Customized Ceramic Abutments after Fatigue

Ceramic Materials and Technologies Applied to Digital Works in Implant-Supported Restorative Dentistry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About