Influence of cementation and cement type on the fracture load testing methodology of anterior crowns made of different materials

Abstract

To evaluate the influence of cementation on fracture load of anterior crowns made of CAD/CAM-resin-blocks (ART), leucite-reinforced glass-ceramics (LRG), lithium disilicate ceramics (LIT), veneered zirconia (ZRO) and veneered alloy (DEG). Each crown group (n=15/ subgroup) was cemented on the metal abutment as follows: i. using glass ionomer, ii. using self-adhesive resin cement, and iii. not cemented. Crowns were tested and analyzed with 2-way and 1-way ANOVA (Scheffé test), and Weibull statistics (p<0.05). Within LRG, self-adhesive cemented subgroup showed higher fracture load compared to other groups (p<0.001). Among DEG, lower results were measured for non-cemented crowns than for cemented (p<0.001). For ART, LIT and ZRO no influence of cementation was observed. For fracture load test methodology, metal ceramic crowns should be generally cemented. Glass-ceramic crowns should be cemented using adhesive cement. Cementation and cement type did not have an influence on the fracture load results for resin, zirconia or lithium disilicate crowns.

Correlations between fracture load of zirconia implant supported single crowns and mechanical properties of restorative material and cement

“…For glass ceramics (IPS Empress CAD) an increase in fracture load was recorded 13) when cemented with self-adhesive cement compared to the situation where no cement was applied, which confirms the results of the present study. In the same study no difference was found in fracture load values between different cementation processes for zirconia 13) . The influence of the cementation mode on lithium disilicate is controversially discussed 12,13) .…”

“…In the same study no difference was found in fracture load values between different cementation processes for zirconia 13) . The influence of the cementation mode on lithium disilicate is controversially discussed 12,13) . In the present study an increase in fracture load was found for lithium disilicate, feldspar ceramic and polymer-infiltrated ceramic depending on the compressive strength of the cement.…”

“…It is known that the type of cement can influence the fracture load for materials with a low intrinsic strength 13,14) . For glass ceramics (IPS Empress CAD) an increase in fracture load was recorded 13) when cemented with self-adhesive cement compared to the situation where no cement was applied, which confirms the results of the present study.…”

“…To predict clinical behavior of restorations, fracture load tests on crowns are performed although their significance is controversially discussed [9][10][11][12][13][14][15] . Due to differences in test set up, fracture load of restorative materials can vary significantly [10][11][12][13][14][15] .…”

“…Due to differences in test set up, fracture load of restorative materials can vary significantly [10][11][12][13][14][15] . Parameters such as crown design, core material, preparation form, loading angle as well as cementation procedures influence fracture load values.…”