Cargando…

In-vitro performance and fracture strength of thin monolithic zirconia crowns

PURPOSE: All-ceramic restorations required extensive tooth preparation. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate a minimally invasive preparation and thickness of monolithic zirconia crowns, which would provide sufficient mechanical endurance and strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Crowns...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weigl, Paul, Sander, Anna, Wu, Yanyun, Felber, Roland, Lauer, Hans-Christoph, Rosentritt, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5917110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29713427
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.2.79
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: All-ceramic restorations required extensive tooth preparation. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate a minimally invasive preparation and thickness of monolithic zirconia crowns, which would provide sufficient mechanical endurance and strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Crowns with thickness of 0.2 mm (group 0.2, n=32) or of 0.5 mm (group 0.5, n=32) were milled from zirconia and fixed with resin-based adhesives (groups 0.2A, 0.5A) or zinc phosphate cements (groups 0.2C, 0.5C). Half of the samples in each subgroup (n=8) underwent thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML)(TC: 5℃ and 55℃, 2×3,000 cycles, 2 min/cycle; ML: 50 N, 1.2×10(6) cycles), while the other samples were stored in water (37℃/24 h). Survival rates were compared (Kaplan-Maier). The specimens surviving TCML were loaded to fracture and the maximal fracture force was determined (ANOVA; Bonferroni; α=.05). The fracture mode was analyzed. RESULTS: In both 0.5 groups, all crowns survived TCML, and the comparison of fracture strength among crowns with and without TCML showed no significant difference (P=.628). Four crowns in group 0.2A and all of the crowns in group 0.2C failed during TCML. The fracture strength after 24 hours of the cemented 0.2 mm-thick crowns was significantly lower than that of adhesive bonded crowns. All cemented crowns provided fracture in the crown, while about 80% of the adhesively bonded crowns fractured through crown and die. CONCLUSION: 0.5 mm thick monolithic crowns possessed sufficient strength to endure physiologic performance, regardless of the type of cementation. Fracture strength of the 0.2 mm cemented crowns was too low for clinical application.