Uniaxial and biaxial flexural strengths of resin-composite CAD-CAM blocks

A literature review on the new polymer‐infiltrated ceramic‐network material (PICN)

“…Three‐point flexural strength followed by Weibull analysis were evaluated by Homaei et al The flexural strength values were 886.9 MPa for Y‐TZP, 356.7 MPa for lithium disilicate glass–ceramic and 135.8 MPa for PICN. These results were similar than the previous mentioned study Coldea et al, where the greatest values were found in the groups Y‐TZP and lithium disilicate glass–ceramic . However, the PICN showed the greatest Weibull modulus among the materials (19.7), suggesting high structure reliability.…”

“…The luting agents had no influence on the crowns fracture load. Therefore, the compressive strength of PICN cemented on titanium implant abutments followed the trend of flexural strength of the material, previously mentioned, that is, the material has superior mechanical properties compared with feldspathic porcelain.…”

“…Argyrou et al showed no statistical difference between the mean values of the nanoceramic resin (170 MPa) and a leucite reinforced glass–ceramic (159 MPa), both presenting greater values compared with PICN (124 MPa) and feldspathic ceramic (120 MPa). Choi et al also found greater values of 3‐point flexural strength for the nanoceramic resin (159.1 MPa) when compared with PICN (140.1 MPa).…”

“…According to Albero et al 3‐point flexural strength values of PICN (Vita Enamic: 180.9 MPa) were similar to the values obtained by a nanoceramic resin (Lava Ultimate: 164.3 MPa). However, PICN showed lower values compared with lithium disilicate glass–ceramic (IPS e.max: 271.6 MPa) and greater values than feldspathic porcelain (Mark II: 137.8 MPa) . Other studies showed greater 3‐point flexural strength values for the nanoceramic resin when compared with PICN.…”

“…However, PICN showed lower values compared with lithium disilicate glass–ceramic (IPS e.max: 271.6 MPa) and greater values than feldspathic porcelain (Mark II: 137.8 MPa) . Other studies showed greater 3‐point flexural strength values for the nanoceramic resin when compared with PICN. Argyrou et al showed no statistical difference between the mean values of the nanoceramic resin (170 MPa) and a leucite reinforced glass–ceramic (159 MPa), both presenting greater values compared with PICN (124 MPa) and feldspathic ceramic (120 MPa).…”