Journal of Technologic Dentistry (대한치과기공학회지)

Korean Academy of Dental Technology (대한치과기공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fracture Strength of All-Ceramic 3-Unit Fixed Partial Dentures Manufactured by CAD/CAM and Copy-Milling Systems

CAD/CAM 및 카피밀링 시스템을 이용하여 제작한 구치부 3-유닛 고정성 국소의치의 파절강도

  • Kang, Hoo-Won (Dept. of Dental Lab. Technology, Dong-A In-Jae College) ;
  • Kim, Hee-Jin (Dep. of Dental Lab. Science, Graduate School, Catholic University, of Pusan) ;
  • Kim, Jang-Ju (Dept. of Dental Lab. Technology, Gwang Yang Health College) ;
  • Ko, Myung-Won (Dept. of Dental Lab. Technology, Gwang Yang Health College)
  • 강후원 (동아인재대학교 치기공과) ;
  • 김희진 (부산가톨릭대학교 치기공학과) ;
  • 김장주 (광양보건대학교 치기공과) ;
  • 고명원 (광양보건대학교 치기공과)
  • Received : 2012.04.18
  • Accepted : 2012.06.26
  • Published : 2012.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Fracture strength of all-ceramic 3-unit fixed partial dentures manufactured by CAD/CAM and copy-milling systems were evaluated. Methods: Zirconia cores were made by milling the pre-sintered zirconia block by CAD/CAM or copy milling method followed by subsequent sintering. By building-up the corresponding porcelains on the core, all-ceramic bridges were fabricated, and those were evaluated in comparison with PFM fixed partial denture. Results: During the flexural test of the 3-unit PFM bridge, the porcelain started to chip or break at 507.28(${\pm}62.82$)kgf and the metal framework did not break until the maximum load level of 800kgf which was set in the testing instrument of this study. However, among all-ceramic restoration test groups, Everest(EV) group showed a peeling off or breakage of the porcelain from 365.64(${\pm}64.96$)kgf and the core was broken at 491.77(${\pm}55.62$)kgf. Those values of Zirkonzahn(ZR) were 431.03(${\pm}58.47$)kgf and 602.74(${\pm}48.44$)kgf, respectively. The break strength of the porcelain of PFM(PM) group was significantly higher than that of EV (p<0.05) group and there was no significant difference when comparing to that of ZR (p>0.05). ZR group showed higher break strength than that of EV group however there was no significant difference (p>0.05). The break strength of cores were in the increasing order of EV < ZR < PM (p<0.05). Conclusion: We could find that even though the PM group fractured at much higher value than all-ceramic cores, the breakage values of the porcelain of PM group with crack formation or delamination, which will be regarded as clinical failure, was significantly higher than that of EV group and not significantly higher than that of ZR group at p-values of 0.05. The break strength of ZR group was higher than that of EV group at an insignificant level(p>0.05).

Keywords

References

  1. Adam PJ, Grossman DG. The castable ceramic crown. Int J Periodont Rest Dent, 2, 33-45, 1984.
  2. Aggstaller H, Beuer F, Funk M, Erdelt KJ, Gernet W. Effect of the preparation design on the fracture resistance of zirconia crown copings. Deutsche Zahnaerztliche Zeitschrift, 61(7), 347-352, 2006.
  3. Campbell SD, Sozio RB. Evaluation of the fit and strength of an all-ceramic fixed partial denture. J Prosthet Dent, 59(3), 301-306, 1998.
  4. Campbell SD. A comparative strength study of metal ceramic and all-ceramic esthetic materials Modulus of rupture. J Prosthet Dent, 62, 476-479, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90184-4
  5. Castellani D, Baccetti T, Giovannoni A, Bernardini UD. Resistance to fracture of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont, 7, 149-154, 1994.
  6. Chang JC, Hart DA, Estey AW, Chan JT. Tensile bond strengths of five luting agents to two CAD-CAM restorative materials and enamel.J Prosthet Dent, 90(1), 18-23, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00217-8
  7. Christenson GJ. The use of porcelain-fused-to-metal restorations in current dental partice: a survey. J Prosthet Dent, 56, 1-3, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90271-4
  8. Craig RG, Powers JM. Restorative dental materials. 11th ed., Mosby, Inc, St. Louis, pp. 60-61, 2002.
  9. Erdelt K, Beuer F, Weiger JS, Berger ME, Gernet W. Flexural strength of milled hite-body zirconia. Quintessenz Zahntech, 30(9), 942-954, 2004.
  10. Futoshi K, Thomas G, Siegbert W, Joerg RS. Influence of framework configuration on the marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide ceramic anterior four-unit frameworks. Acta Odontol Scand, 63(6), 361-366, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016350500264313
  11. Ichim I, Li Q, Li W, Swain MV, Kieser J. Modelling of fracture behaviour in biomaterials. Biomater, 28(7), 1317-1326, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.10.035
  12. Jahn F, Bode D, Goebel R, Gnauck M, Kuepper H. In vitro-investigation of CAD/CAM all - ceramic resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. Deutsche Zahnaerztliche Zeitschrift, 61(8), 417-421, 2006.
  13. Kelly JR, Teskl JA, Sorensen JA. Failure of All-ceramic Fixed Partial Dentures in vitro and in vivo: Analysis and Modeling. J Dent Res, 74(6), 1253-1258, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345950740060301
  14. Kelly JR. Clinically relevant approach to failure testing of all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent, 81(6), 652-661, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70103-4
  15. Kim SH, Lee JH. Kim YL. Dong JK. Fracture Strength of the IPS Empress crown: The effect of occlusal depth and axial inclination on lower first molar. J Kor Acad Prosthodont, 41, 48-60, 2003.
  16. Krmer N, Frankenberger R, Pelka M, Petschelt A. IPS Empress inlays and onlays after four years - a clinical study. J Dent, 27(5), 325-331, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(98)00059-1
  17. Morris HF. Veterans adminstration cooperative studies project NO. 147. Part IV: Biocompatibility of base metal alloys. J Prosthet Dent, 589(1), 1-4, 1987.
  18. Oh WS, Anusavice KJ. Effect of connector design on the fracture resistance of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent, 87(5), 536-542, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.123850
  19. Probster L. Compressive strength of two morden all-ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont, 5(5), 409-414, 1992.
  20. Ralph GL, Mandy SH, Heike R, Volker H, Michael HW. CAD / CAM-machining effects on YTZP zirconia. Dent Mater, 20(7), 655-662, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2003.08.007
  21. Rosentritt M, Behr M, Kolbeck C, Handel G. Marginal adaptation and fracture resistance of all-ceramic FPDs. Deutsche Zahnaerztliche Zeitschrift, 61(7), 353-357, 2006.
  22. Thompson Y, Anusavice KJ, Naman A, Morris HF. Fracture surface characterization of clinically failed all-ceramic crowns. J Dent Res, 73, 1824-1832, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345940730120601
  23. Thompson JY, Stoner BR, Piascik JR. Ceramics for restorative dentistry: Critical aspects for fracture and fatigue resistance. Mat Sci Eng C, 27(3), 565-569, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2006.05.034
  24. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Augthun M, Spiekermann H. Fracture Resistance of Lithium Disilicate-, Alumina-, and Zirconia-Based Three-Unit Fixed Partial Dentures: A Laboratory Study. Int J Prosthodont, 14(3), 231-238, 2001.
  25. Wagner WC, Chu TM. Biaxial flexural strength and indentation fracture toughness of three new dental core ceramics. J Prosthet Dent, 76(2), 140-144, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90297-8