No abstract

Statement of problem Preparation designs and ceramic thicknesses are key factors for the long-term success of minimally invasive premolar partial coverage restorations. However, only limited information is presently available on this topic. Purpose The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the fracture resistance and failure modes of ceramic premolar partial coverage restorations with different preparation designs and ceramic thicknesses. Material and methods Caries-free human premolars (n= 144) were divided into 9 groups. Palatal onlay preparation comprised reduction of the palatal cusp by 2 mm (Palatal-Onlay-Standard), 1 mm (Palatal-Onlay-Thin), or 0.5 mm (Palatal-Onlay-Ultra-Thin). Complete-coverage onlay preparation additionally included the buccal cusp (Occlusal-Onlay-Standard; Occlusal-Onlay-Thin; Occlusal-Onlay-Ultra-Thin). Labial surface preparations with chamfer reductions of 0.8 mm (Complete-Veneer-Standard), 0.6 mm (Complete-Veneer-Thin) and 0.4 mm (Complete-Veneer-Ultra-Thin) were implemented for complete veneer restorations. Restorations were fabricated from a pressable lithium-disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max-Press) and cemented adhesively (Syntac-Classic/Variolink-II). All specimens were subjected to cyclic mechanical loading (F= 49 N, 1.2 million cycles) and simultaneous thermocycling (5°C to 55°C) in a mouth-motion simulator. After fatigue, restorations were exposed to single-load-to-failure. Two-way ANOVA was used to identify statistical differences. Pair-wise differences were calculated and P-values were adjusted by the Tukey–Kramer method (α= .05). Results All specimens survived fatigue. Mean (SD) load to failure values (N) were as follows: 837 (320/Palatal-Onlay-Standard), 1055 (369/Palatal-Onlay-Thin), 1192 (342/Palatal-Onlay-Ultra-Thin), 963 (405/Occlusal-Onlay-Standard), 1108 (340/Occlusal-Onlay-Thin), 997 (331/Occlusal-Onlay-Ultra-Thin), 1361 (333/Complete-Veneer-Standard), 1087 (251/Complete-Veneer-Thin), 883 (311/Complete-Veneer-Ultra-Thin). Palatal-onlay restorations revealed a significantly higher fracture resistance with ultra-thin thicknesses than with standard thicknesses (P=.015). Onlay restorations were not affected by thickness variations. Fracture loads of standard complete veneers were significantly higher than thin (P=.03) and ultra-thin (P<.001) restorations. Conclusions In this in vitro study, the reduction of preparation depth to 1.00 and 0.5 mm did not impair fracture resistance of pressable lithium-disilicate ceramic onlay restorations but resulted in lower failure loads in complete veneer restorations on premolars.

Monolithic CAD/CAM fabricated lithium-disilicate FDPs appeared to be a reliable treatment alternative for the posterior load-bearing area, whereas FDPs in bi-layer configuration were susceptible to low load fracture failure.

This paper presents a distribution function which allows to calculate the residence time distribution in a counter rotating twin screw extruder. Only the minimum and mean residence time appear in this function. The agreement between calculated and experimentally determined residence times is satisfactory. Longitudinal mixing capacity is discribed with the aid of the residence time variance.