Cargando…

Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study

AIMS: The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone (PEEK) copings when veneered with lithium di-silicate with that of PEEK veneered with composite. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: In vitro; comparative study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Abhishek Kumar, Gupta, Rekha, Gill, Shubhra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34380818
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_86_21
_version_ 1783749837332676608
author Gupta, Abhishek Kumar
Gupta, Rekha
Gill, Shubhra
author_facet Gupta, Abhishek Kumar
Gupta, Rekha
Gill, Shubhra
author_sort Gupta, Abhishek Kumar
collection PubMed
description AIMS: The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone (PEEK) copings when veneered with lithium di-silicate with that of PEEK veneered with composite. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: In vitro; comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Congruently anatomically shaped single unit PEEK copings (n = 40) were fabricated by scanning a prepared typodont tooth. The PEEK copings were subdivided among four groups (n = 10/group). Among all, one group of PEEK coping was veneered with Urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA)-based composite and other groups were veneered with lithium-di-silicate after different surface treatment on peek copings, i.e., (i) composite veneered PEEK fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) (control group: Group PC), (ii) lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDP (no surface treatment: Group PCeN), (iii) lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDP (sandblasting with 50 μm alumina: Group PCeS), and (iv) lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDP (chemical etching with 98% sulfuric acid: Group PCeE). The load-bearing capacity of all specimens was assessed using a universal test machine. All the samples were loaded till the cracking point and load at that point and failure modes were noted down. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: One-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. RESULTS: The highest load-bearing capacity was recorded for lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK copings which were chemically etched with 98% sulfuric acid (Group PCeE: 1040.25 ± 77.46) followed by Group PCeS (1017.20 ± 53.70), then Group PC (965 ± 51.57) and least was for Group PCeN (933 ± 97.54). There was a significant reduction in mean load-bearing capacity in Group PCeN (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Veneering of PEEK with pressed lithium di-silicate seems to be a viable clinical option in terms of adequate load-bearing capacity. Lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDPs were successful against physiological occlusal forces and are a suitable material for FDPs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8425363
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84253632022-07-01 Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study Gupta, Abhishek Kumar Gupta, Rekha Gill, Shubhra J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIMS: The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone (PEEK) copings when veneered with lithium di-silicate with that of PEEK veneered with composite. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: In vitro; comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Congruently anatomically shaped single unit PEEK copings (n = 40) were fabricated by scanning a prepared typodont tooth. The PEEK copings were subdivided among four groups (n = 10/group). Among all, one group of PEEK coping was veneered with Urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA)-based composite and other groups were veneered with lithium-di-silicate after different surface treatment on peek copings, i.e., (i) composite veneered PEEK fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) (control group: Group PC), (ii) lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDP (no surface treatment: Group PCeN), (iii) lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDP (sandblasting with 50 μm alumina: Group PCeS), and (iv) lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDP (chemical etching with 98% sulfuric acid: Group PCeE). The load-bearing capacity of all specimens was assessed using a universal test machine. All the samples were loaded till the cracking point and load at that point and failure modes were noted down. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: One-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. RESULTS: The highest load-bearing capacity was recorded for lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK copings which were chemically etched with 98% sulfuric acid (Group PCeE: 1040.25 ± 77.46) followed by Group PCeS (1017.20 ± 53.70), then Group PC (965 ± 51.57) and least was for Group PCeN (933 ± 97.54). There was a significant reduction in mean load-bearing capacity in Group PCeN (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Veneering of PEEK with pressed lithium di-silicate seems to be a viable clinical option in terms of adequate load-bearing capacity. Lithium di-silicate veneered PEEK FDPs were successful against physiological occlusal forces and are a suitable material for FDPs. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021 2021-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8425363/ /pubmed/34380818 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_86_21 Text en Copyright: © 2021 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gupta, Abhishek Kumar
Gupta, Rekha
Gill, Shubhra
Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study
title Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study
title_full Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study
title_fullStr Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study
title_short Evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: An in vitro study
title_sort evaluation of the failure modes and load-bearing capacity of different surface-treated polyether ether ketone copings veneered with lithium di-silicate compared to polyether ether ketone copings veneered with composite: an in vitro study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34380818
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_86_21
work_keys_str_mv AT guptaabhishekkumar evaluationofthefailuremodesandloadbearingcapacityofdifferentsurfacetreatedpolyetheretherketonecopingsveneeredwithlithiumdisilicatecomparedtopolyetheretherketonecopingsveneeredwithcompositeaninvitrostudy
AT guptarekha evaluationofthefailuremodesandloadbearingcapacityofdifferentsurfacetreatedpolyetheretherketonecopingsveneeredwithlithiumdisilicatecomparedtopolyetheretherketonecopingsveneeredwithcompositeaninvitrostudy
AT gillshubhra evaluationofthefailuremodesandloadbearingcapacityofdifferentsurfacetreatedpolyetheretherketonecopingsveneeredwithlithiumdisilicatecomparedtopolyetheretherketonecopingsveneeredwithcompositeaninvitrostudy