Dergiler / Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3

COMPARISON OF FRACTURE RESISTANCE BETWEEN TWO MONOLITHIC AND ONE VENEERED ZIRCONIA MATERIALS ON MOLAR CROWNS AFTER THERMOMECHANICAL FATIGUE

Sayfa
320–326
Yayın Tarihi
2020-09-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: Thermomechanical fatigue has significant influence on monolithic zirconia, however, it showed higher fracture loads and can be alternative to veneered design.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: The purpose of this in-vitro study is to evaluate fracture resistance of two monolithic and one veneered zirconia crowns on human molar teeth fabricated after thermomechanical fatigue.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The specimens were divided into three experimental groups (n=24) according to restoration design, monolithic or veneered.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: Thermomechanical fatigue has significant influence on monolithic zirconia, however, it showed higher fracture loads and can be alternative to veneered design.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:zirconia · monolithic · fracture

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this in-vitro study is to evaluate fracture resistance of two monolithic and one veneered zirconia crowns on human molar teeth fabricated after thermomechanical fatigue. Materials and methods: Seventy-two human molar teeth were prepared to receive zirconia crowns. The specimens were divided into three experimental groups (n=24) according to restoration design, monolithic or veneered. The crowns were fabricated from GC initial zirconia, Dentsply Sirona TZI and Dentsply Sirona ZI. The prepared teeth were scanned with Sirona inEos X5 and the restorations were milled using Cerec inLab MC X5. The crowns were cemented by resin cement. Twelve crowns of each experimental group underwent thermomechanical fatigue using chewing Simulator for 240 000 chewing cycles with load of (100 N) and thermocycling (5 °C/55 °C), the remaining 12 crowns in each group did not undergo any thermomechanical fatigue and were considered as control group. All specimens were loaded until fracture using universal testing machine. Forces were applied to occlusal surface with 90° angle. Loads of fracture were recorded. Collected data of fracture loads of all specimens were analyzed using SPSS 23.00 program. Results: Although thermomechanical fatigue significantly decreased fracture loads of only monolithic groups, monolithic zirconia crowns had higher fracture loads than veneered one. Among all specimens, the highest fracture load was found in GC group (5001,81 N) and the lowest was found in ZI group (2117.37 N). Conclusion: Thermomechanical fatigue has significant influence on monolithic zirconia, however, it showed higher fracture loads and can be alternative to veneered design.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KAYALI, F., KAHRAMANOĞLU, E. (2020). COMPARISON OF FRACTURE RESISTANCE BETWEEN TWO MONOLITHIC AND ONE VENEERED ZIRCONIA MATERIALS ON MOLAR CROWNS AFTER THERMOMECHANICAL FATIGUE. Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3, 320–326. https://ajindex.com/articles/481684

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (1)

  1. Samorodnitzky-Naveh GR, Geiger SB, Levin L. Patients' satisfaction with dental esthetics. Journal of the American Dental Association. 2007;138:805-808 2. Pozzi A, Tallarico M, Barlattani A. Monolithic lithium disilicate full-contour crowns bonded on CAD/CAM zirconia complete-arch implant bridges with 3 to 5 years of follow-up. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2015;41:450-458. 3. Lameira DP, Buarque e Silva WA, Andrade e Silva F, De Souza GM. Fracture strength of aged monolithic and bilayer zirconia-based crowns. Biomed Research International. 2015;418641. 4. López-Suáreza C, Castillo-Oyagüea R, Rodríguez-Alonsoa V, D. Lynchb C, Suárez-García M. Fracture load of metal-ceramic, monolithic, and bi-layered zirconia-based posterior fixed dental prostheses after thermo-mechanical cycling. Journal of Dentistry. 2018;73:97-104. 5. Güngör MB, Nemli SK. Fracture resistance of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramic and veneered zirconia molar crowns after aging in a mastication simulator. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2018;119(3):473-480. 6. Preis V, Behr M, Hahnel S, Handel G, Rosentritt M. In vitro failure and fracture resistance of veneered and full-contour zirconia restorations. Journal of Dentistry. 2012;11:921-928. 7. Daou E. The zirconia restoration properties: a versatile restorative material. Open Dentistry Journal. 2014;8:33-42. 8. Guess PC, Zavanelli RA, Silva NR, Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Thompson VP. Monolithic CAD/CAM lithium disilicate versus veneered Y-TZP crowns: comparison of failure modes and reliability after fatigue. International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2010;25:434-442. 9. Sarıkaya I, Hayran Y. Effects of dynamic aging on the wear and fracture strength of monolithic zirconia restorations. BMC Oral Health. 2018;1:146. 10. Schmitter M, Mueller D, Rues S. In vitro chipping behavior of all‐ceramic crowns with a zirconia framework and feldspathic veneering: comparison of CAD/CAM‐produced veneer with manually layered veneer. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2013;40:519-525. 11. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. British Dental Journal. 2008;204:505-511. 12. Silva LHD, Lima E, Miranda RBP, Favero SS, Lohbauer U, Cesar PF. Dental ceramics: a review of new materials and processing methods. Brazilian Oral Research. 2017;31:e58. 13. Zhang Y, Lee JJ, Srikanth R, Lawn BR, Edge chipping and flexural resistance of monolithic ceramics. Dental Materials. 2013;29(12):1201-1208. 14. Ra