The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Flexural strengths of implant-supported zirconia based bridges in posterior regions

  • Rismanchian, Mansour (Dental Implants Research Center, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Shafiei, Soufia (Torabinezhad Dental Research Center, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Nourbakhshian, Farzaneh (Dental Students Research Center, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Davoudi, Amin (Dental Students Research Center, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences)
  • Received : 2014.01.02
  • Accepted : 2014.06.13
  • Published : 2014.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. Impact forces in implant supported FDP (fixed dental prosthesis) are higher than that of tooth supported FDPs and the compositions used in frameworks also has a paramount role for biomechanical reasons. The aim of this study was to evaluate the flexural strength of two different zirconia frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two implant abutments with 3.8 mm and 4.5 mm platform were used as premolar and molar. They were mounted vertically in an acrylic resin block. A model with steel retainers and removable abutments was fabricated by milling machine; and 10 FDP frameworks were fabricated for each Biodenta and Cercon systems. All samples were thermo-cycled for 2000 times in $5-55^{\circ}C$ temperature and embedded in $37^{\circ}C$ artificial saliva for one week. The flexural test was done by a rod with 2 mm ending diameter which was applied to the multi-electromechanical machine. The force was inserted until observing fracture. The collected data were analyzed with SPSS software ver.15, using Weibull modulus and independent t-test with the level of significance at ${\alpha}=.05$. RESULTS. The mean load bearing capacity values were higher in Biodenta but with no significant differences (P>.05). The Biodenta frameworks showed higher load bearing capacity ($F_0=1700$) than Cercon frameworks ($F_0=1520$) but the reliability (m) was higher in Cercon (m=7.5). CONCLUSION. There was no significant difference between flexural strengths of both zirconia based framework systems; and both Biodenta and Cercon systems are capable to withstand biting force (even parafunctions) in posterior implant-supported bridges with no significant differences.

Keywords

References

  1. Scurria MS, Bader JD, Shugars DA. Meta-analysis of fixed partial denture survival: prostheses and abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:459-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70162-3
  2. Tan K, Pjetursson BE, Lang NP, Chan ES. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:654-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01119.x
  3. Raigrodski AJ. Contemporary materials and technologies for all-ceramic fixed partial dentures: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:557-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.09.015
  4. Christel P, Meunier A, Heller M, Torre JP, Peille CN. Mechanical properties and short-term in-vivo evaluation of yttrium-oxide-partially-stabilized zirconia. J Biomed Mater Res 1989;23:45-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820230105
  5. Tinschert J, Natt G, Hassenpflug S, Spiekermann H. Status of current CAD/CAM technology in dental medicine. Int J Comput Dent 2004;7:25-45.
  6. Filser F, Kocher P, Weibel F, Luthy H, Scharer P, Gauckler LJ. Reliability and strength of all-ceramic dental restorations fabricated by direct ceramic machining (DCM). Int J Comput Dent 2001;4:89-106.
  7. Coornaert J, Adriaens P, De Boever J. Long-term clinical study of porcelain-fused-to-gold restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:338-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(84)90217-8
  8. Valderhaug J. A 15-year clinical evaluation of fixed prosthodontics. Acta Odontol Scand 1991;49:35-40. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359109041138
  9. Raigrodski AJ, Chiche GJ, Potiket N, Hochstedler JL, Mohamed SE, Billiot S, Mercante DE. The efficacy of posterior three-unit zirconium-oxide-based ceramic fixed partial dental prostheses: a prospective clinical pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96:237-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.08.010
  10. Holm C, Tidehag P, Tillberg A, Molin M. Longevity and quality of FPDs: a retrospective study of restorations 30, 20, and 10 years after insertion. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:283-9.
  11. Leempoel PJ, Kayser AF, Van Rossum GM, De Haan AF. The survival rate of bridges. A study of 1674 bridges in 40 Dutch general practices. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22:327-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1995.tb00780.x
  12. Kelly JR. Dental ceramics: what is this stuff anyway? J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139:4S-7S.
  13. Kawai K, Urano M. Adherence of plaque components to different restorative materials. Oper Dent 2001;26:396-400.
  14. Harder S, Wolfart S, Eschbach S, Kern M. Eight-year outcome of posterior inlay-retained all-ceramic fixed dental prostheses. J Dent 2010;38:875-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.012
  15. Studart AR, Filser F, Kocher P, Gauckler LJ. In vitro lifetime of dental ceramics under cyclic loading in water. Biomaterials 2007;28:2695-705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.12.033
  16. Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D. Comparison between implantsupported prostheses and teeth regarding passive threshold level. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:549-54.
  17. Bacchi A, Consani RL, Mesquita MF, dos Santos MB. Stress distribution in fixed-partial prosthesis and peri-implant bone tissue with different framework materials and vertical misfit levels: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Oral Sci 2013;55:239-44. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.55.239
  18. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Luthy H, Gauckler LJ, Scharer P, Franz Hammerle CH. Prospective clinical study of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 3-year follow-up. Quintessence Int 2006;37:685-93.
  19. Okabayashi S, Nomoto S, Sato T, Miho O. Influence of proximal supportive design of zirconia framework on fracture load of veneering porcelain. Dent Mater J 2013;32:572-7. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2013-039
  20. Bacchi A, Consani RL, Mesquita MF, Dos Santos MB. Effect of framework material and vertical misfit on stress distribution in implant-supported partial prosthesis under load application: 3-D finite element analysis. Acta Odontol Scand 2013; 71:1243-9. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.757644
  21. Beuer F, Steff B, Naumann M, Sorensen JA. Load-bearing capacity of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures with different computer-aided design (CAD)/computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) fabricated framework materials. Eur J Oral Sci 2008;116:381-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00551.x
  22. Kohorst P, Herzog TJ, Borchers L, Stiesch-Scholz M. Loadbearing capacity of all-ceramic posterior four-unit fixed partial dentures with different zirconia frameworks. Eur J Oral Sci 2007;115:161-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2007.00429.x
  23. Luthy H, Filser F, Loeffel O, Schumacher M, Gauckler LJ, Hammerle CH. Strength and reliability of four-unit all-ceramic posterior bridges. Dent Mater 2005;21:930-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.11.012
  24. Salimi H, Mosharraf R, Savabi O. Effect of framework design on fracture resistance of zirconium oxide posterior fixed partial dentures. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012;9:764-9.
  25. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Luthy H, Hammerle CH. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 2007;20:383-8.
  26. Tinschert J, Schulze KA, Natt G, Latzke P, Heussen N, Spiekermann H. Clinical behavior of zirconia-based fixed partial dentures made of DC-Zirkon: 3-year results. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:217-22.
  27. Tsumita M, Kokubo Y, Vult von Steyern P, Fukushima S. Effect of framework shape on the fracture strength of implant- supported all-ceramic fixed partial dentures in the molar region. J Prosthodont 2008;17:274-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00287.x
  28. Oh WS, Anusavice KJ. Effect of connector design on the fracture resistance of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:536-42. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.123850
  29. Oh W, Gotzen N, Anusavice KJ. Influence of connector design on fracture probability of ceramic fixed-partial dentures. J Dent Res 2002;81:623-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910208100909
  30. Scherrer SS, de Rijk WG. The fracture resistance of all-ceramic crowns on supporting structures with different elastic moduli. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6:462-7.
  31. Kelly JR. Perspectives on strength. Dent Mater 1995;11:103-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(95)80043-3
  32. Lundgren D, Laurell L. Occlusal forces in prosthetically restored dentitions: a methodological study. J Oral Rehabil 1984;11:29-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1984.tb00549.x
  33. Tinschert J, Zwez D, Marx R, Anusavice KJ. Structural reliability of alumina-, feldspar-, leucite-, mica- and zirconiabased ceramics. J Dent 2000;28:529-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00030-0
  34. Kelly JR, Tesk JA, Sorensen JA. Failure of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures in vitro and in vivo: analysis and modeling. J Dent Res 1995;74:1253-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345950740060301
  35. Molin MK, Onesti MP, Petersson TB, Derand TB. Threedimensional finite element analyses of all-ceramic posterior fixed partial dentures with different designs. Int J Prosthodont 2007;20:89-91.
  36. Augereau D, Pierrisnard L, Barquins M. Relevance of the finite element method to optimize fixed partial denture design. Part I. Influence of the size of the connector on the magnitude of strain. Clin Oral Investig 1998;2:36-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007840050041

Cited by

  1. Zirconia based dental ceramics: structure, mechanical properties, biocompatibility and applications vol.45, pp.48, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1039/C6DT03484E
  2. Examination of stress distribution and fracture resistance in five-unit tooth- and implant-supported partial fixed zirconia prosthesis vol.29, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1080/13102818.2015.1073122
  3. 3D 프린팅으로 제작된 여러 종류의 레진브릿지의 굴곡강도에 대한 연구 vol.33, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2017.33.4.260
  4. On the Cleanliness of Different Oral Implant Systems: A Pilot Study vol.8, pp.9, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091280
  5. Static and Fatigue Loading of Veneered Implant‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses vol.29, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13173
  6. Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of the Veneer-Framework Thickness in an All-Ceramic Implant Supported Fixed Partial Denture vol.4, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/ceramics4020015