The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

The effect of zirconia framework design on the failure of all-ceramic crown under static loading

  • Received : 2014.08.29
  • Accepted : 2014.12.15
  • Published : 2015.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This in vitro study aimed to compare the failure load and failure characteristics of two different zirconia framework designs of premolar crowns when subjected to static loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two types of zirconia frameworks, conventional 0.5 mm even thickness framework design (EV) and 0.8 mm cutback of full contour crown anatomy design (CB), were made for 10 samples each. The veneer porcelain was added on under polycarbonate shell crown made by vacuum of full contour crown to obtain the same total thickness of the experiment crowns. The crowns were cemented onto the Cobalt-Chromium die. The dies were tilted 45 degrees from the vertical plane to obtain the shear force to the cusp when loading. All crowns were loaded at the lingual incline of the buccal cusp until fracture using a universal testing machine with cross-head speed 0.5 mm/min. The load to fracture values (N) was recorded and statistically analyzed by independent sample t-test. RESULTS. The mean and standard deviations of the failure load were $1,170.1{\pm}90.9$ N for EV design and $1,450.4{\pm}175.7$ N for CB design. A significant difference in the compressive failure load was found (P<.05). For the failure characteristic, the EV design was found only cohesive failures within veneering porcelain, while the CB design found more failures through the zirconia framework (8 from 10 samples). CONCLUSION. There was a significant difference in the failure load between two designs, and the design of the framework influences failure characteristic of zirconia crown.

Keywords

References

  1. Raigrodski AJ, Chiche GJ, Potiket N, Hochstedler JL, Mohamed SE, Billiot S, Mercante DE. The efficacy of posterior threeunit 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
  2. Rosentritt M, Steiger D, Behr M, Handel G, Kolbeck C. Influence of substructure design and spacer settings on the in vitro performance of molar zirconia crowns. J Dent 2009;37:978-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.08.003
  3. Coelho PG, Silva NR, Bonfante EA, Guess PC, Rekow ED, Thompson VP. Fatigue testing of two porcelain-zirconia allceramic crown systems. Dent Mater 2009;25:1122-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.03.009
  4. Marchack BW, Futatsuki Y, Marchack CB, White SN. Customization of milled zirconia copings for all-ceramic crowns: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:169-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(08)00028-0
  5. Shoher I, Whiteman AE. Reinforced porcelain system: a new concept in ceramometal restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:489-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90567-X
  6. Marker JC, Goodkind RJ, Gerberich WW. The compressive strength of nonprecious versus precious ceramometal restorations with various frame designs. J Prosthet Dent 1986;55:560-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90031-4
  7. Sailer I, Fehér A, Filser F, Lüthy H, Gauckler LJ, Schärer P, Franz Hämmerle CH. Prospective clinical study of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 3-year follow-up. Quintessence Int 2006;37:685-93.
  8. Al-Amleh B1, Lyons K, Swain M. Clinical trials in zirconia: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2010;37:641-52.
  9. 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.
  10. Larsson C1, El Madhoun S, Wennerberg A, Vult von Steyern P. Fracture strength of yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystals crowns with different design: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:820-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02224.x
  11. Swain MV. Unstable cracking (chipping) of veneering porcelain on all-ceramic dental crowns and fixed partial dentures. Acta Biomater 2009;5:1668-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2008.12.016
  12. Richerson D, Richerson DW, Lee WE. Modern ceramic engineering: properties, processing and use in design. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: Taylor and Francis Group; 2006.
  13. Bonfante EA, da Silva NR, Coelho PG, Bayardo-González DE, Thompson VP, Bonfante G. Effect of framework design on crown failure. Eur J Oral Sci 2009;117:194-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00608.x
  14. Khers SC, Carpenter CW, Vetter JD, Staley RN. Anatomy of cusps of posterior teeth and their fracture potential. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:139-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90168-C
  15. Pinho ST, D'avila CG, Camanho PP, Iannucci L, Robinson P. Failure models and criteria for FRP under in-plane or threedimensional stress states including shear non-linearity. NASA/TM-2005-213530, L-19089.
  16. Cavel WT, Kelsey WP, Blankenau RJ. An in vivo study of cuspal fracture. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53:38-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90061-7
  17. Farah JW, Craig RG. Distribution of stresses in porcelainfused-to-metal and porcelain jacket crowns. J Dent Res 1975;54:255-61.
  18. Craig RG, el-Ebrashi MK, Peyton FA. Stress distribution in porcelain-fused-to-gold crowns and preparations constructed with photoelastic plastics. J Dent Res 1971;50:1278-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345710500053101
  19. Nally JN, Farah JW, Craig RG. Experimental stress analysis of dental restorations. IX. Two-dimensional photoelastic stress analysis of porcelain bonded to gold crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1971;25:307-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(71)90192-2
  20. Lawn BR, Pajares A, Zhang Y, Deng Y, Polack MA, Lloyd IK, Rekow ED, Thompson VP. Materials design in the performance of all-ceramic crowns. Biomaterials 2004;25:2885-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.09.050
  21. Kleinfelder JW, Ludwigt K. Maximal bite force in patients with reduced periodontal tissue support with and without splinting. J Periodontol 2002;73:1184-7. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2002.73.10.1184

Cited by

  1. Veneered Zirconia-Based Restorations Fracture Resistance Analysis pp.1059941X, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12490
  2. Effect of Two Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness, Topography, and Flexural Strength of a Monolithic Lithium Disilicate Ceramic pp.1059941X, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12586
  3. Effect of screw access hole design on the fracture resistance of implant-supported zirconia-based restorations pp.14964155, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12422
  4. Mechanical and Surface Properties of Monolithic Zirconia vol.43, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.2341/17-019-L
  5. Numerical Analysis of a Dental Zirconium Restoration and the Stresses That Occur in Dental Tissues vol.2019, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1049306
  6. Effect of artificial aging on high translucent dental zirconia: simulation of early failure vol.128, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12739
  7. Shear Bond Strength of Veneered Zirconia Repaired Using Various Methods and Adhesive Systems: A Comparative Study vol.13, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13060910
  8. A REVIEW OF MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF DENTAL CERAMIC RESTORATIONS vol.21, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219519421500639