Reliability, failure probability, and strength of resin-based materials for CAD/CAM restorations

Lim, Kart-Leong; Yap, Adrian Ujin; Agarwalla, Shruti Vidhawan; Tan, Kong-Bing; Rosa, Vinícius

doi:10.1590/1678-775720150561

Cited by 30 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For strength measurements, direct comparisons, even with the same test, should be carefully made because of the influence of the geometry of samples on the results . Reported flexural strength values for Enamic and CERASMART, as well as flexural modulus values for Enamic and CERASMART, are within the same range as the values determined in this study. One study, using a biaxial flexural strength test, reported similar values for KZR .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

“…It has been hypothesized that a low flexural modulus could lead to restorative deformation under load, resulting in accelerated wear and hoop stress that may cause crown debonding . It was noticed that Enamic 3pb samples fractured with lesser fragments compared to dispersed‐fillers RCB, which may be indicative of its ability to endure more mechanical stress and elastic deformation before fracture …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fracture Toughness, Flexural Strength, and Flexural Modulus of New CAD/CAM Resin Composite Blocks

Lucsanszky

Ruse

2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:To determine and compare the fracture toughness, flexural strength and flexural modulus of four new, commercially available CAD/CAM resin composite blocks and one new CAD/CAM lithium disilicate glass-ceramic block, tested under dry and aged conditions. Materials and Methods: Three dispersed-fillers resin composite blocks, CERAS-MART, KZR-CAD-HR2, and CAMouflage NOW, one polymer-infiltrated ceramic network resin composite block, Enamic, along with Obsidian, a lithium disilicate glass-ceramic block, were characterized. Fracture toughness was determined through the notchless triangular prism specimen test, while flexural strength and flexural modulus were determined by three-point bend testing. Blocks were cut and ground to obtain (6 × 6 × 6 × 12) mm prisms and 10:1 span-to-thickness ratio bars (n = 25/group); half of the resin composite specimens were aged in 37°C distilled water for 30 days before testing. Fractured surfaces were characterized using a scanning electron microscope. Results were analyzed using Weibull statistics and two-way ANOVA, followed by Scheffé multiple means comparisons (α = 0.05). Results: With regards to fracture toughness, KZR stood out among resin composites with a dry value of 1.37 MPa·m 1/2 ; this was significantly affected by ageing, while the fracture toughness of the other dispersed-fillers resin composite blocks was not. Obsidian had the highest fracture toughness at 1.47 MPa·m 1/2 . With regards to flexural strength, Obsidian > CERASMART = KZR > CAMouflage > Enamic. The flexural strength of the resin composites was lowered by ageing. Enamic was found to have the highest flexural modulus among the resin composites (33.02 GPa), but its value was significantly lower than that of Obsidian (76.46 GPa); flexural modulus was not affected by ageing. Conclusion: There was a significant difference in flexural strength between the materials, but not unanimously in flexural modulus and fracture toughness. The tested resin composite block materials had inferior flexural strength, flexural modulus and fracture toughness compared with the tested lithium disilicate glass-ceramic block (Obsidian). Enamic, the polymer infiltrated ceramic network material, had a significantly higher flexural modulus than the dispersed-fillers materials. Ageing had a deleterious impact on the flexural strength of all RCB, while its effect on the flexural modulus was insignificant. The selection of any restorative material requires a thorough analysis of its advantages and limitations to inform the clinical decision in a case-by-case approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Toughness, Flexural Strength, and Flexural Modulus of New CAD/CAM Resin Composite Blocks

Lucsanszky

Ruse

2019

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For clinical applications the 5% failure probability level (σ 0.05 ) is considered as more relevant than the 63.2% level expressed by σ 0 [45], as it may better clarify early failure incidence. In all treatments after 37 • C/1 week storage the σ 0.05 values were >50% of σ 0 , except of HF+MEP (46% of σ 0 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Etch Silane Primer: Reactivity and Bonding with a Lithium Disilicate Ceramic

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study was to evaluate the stability, reactivity, and bond strength with a lithium disilicate ceramic of a self-etch silane primer (Monobond Etch and Prime/MEP). The stability was evaluated by 1H-,31P-NMR spectroscopy (before/after aging), and the reactivity by micro MIR-FTIR spectroscopy on Ge surfaces (0, 1, 24 h) using a prehydrolyzed silane primer (Calibra Silane Coupling Agent/CLB), as a control. The effect of MEP vs. 5% HF-etching on ceramic roughness was assessed by optical profilometry. The shear bond strength (SBS) of a resin composite bonded to polished ceramic surfaces treated with MEP, HF without silane (HF+NS), HF+CLB, and HF+MEP (n = 20) was evaluated after storage in water (A: 37 °C/1 week, B: 5000×/5–55 °C and C: 100 °C/24 h). Aging did not affect the silanol groups of MEP, but only the phosphate co-monomer. Silanols were reactive forming siloxanes, but exhibited lower consumption rate than CLB. HF-etching induced significantly higher values than MEP, in all the roughness parameters tested (Sa, Sz, Sdr, Sc, Sv), with the greatest differences found in Sdr and Sv. For SBS, MEP was inferior to all treatments/storage conditions, except of HF+NS in A, where the values were similar. However, on a HF-etched substrate, MEP provided highest strength and reliability.

show abstract

“…Reinforced single-layer materials can be characterized with extrinsic paint and exhibit satisfactory aesthetic performance. In addition to dispensing ceramic coating, such restorations have been shown to have increased toughness to masticatory efforts [14,15,[26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Modulus Of Elasticity (Gpa) Flexural Strength (Mpa)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of mechanical properties of CAD/CAM ceramic systems: literature review

Lima

Filho

Paranhos

2020

RGO, Rev. Gaúch. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer aided design / computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems are among the most technological advanced techniques in oral rehab today. Compared with conventional techniques, they can optimize the resistance and the adaptation of dental ceramics. Thus, their indications of use have been widened, making the technique more and more well-known and widespread. Therefore, the aim of this study is to present a literature review on comparative studies of the mechanical properties of ceramic systems produced by CAD / CAM. A search for scientific articles published between 2009 and 2019, in English, Spanish or Portuguese, was performed through the databases SCIELO, BIREME and PUBMED, using the descriptors “Ceramics”, “Computer Aided Design” and “ Partial Fixed Prosthesis “. Currently, all ceramic systems appear to have adequate strength for simple rehabilitations, but ceramic restorations produced by CAD/CAM systems present greater reliability than other manufacturing methods, presenting a wider array of indications due to their higher mechanical resistance. These systems, besides their versatility, also present an excellent aesthetic result, guaranteeing appropriate optical properties such as translucency and fluorescence, similar to natural teeth. Although the cost is a limiting factor, CAD/CAM technology is in full development and with high success rates that qualifies it as the state of art in oral rehabilitation.

show abstract

Reliability, failure probability, and strength of resin-based materials for CAD/CAM restorations

Abstract: www.scielo.br/jaos http://dx

Cited by 30 publications

References 23 publications

Fracture Toughness, Flexural Strength, and Flexural Modulus of New CAD/CAM Resin Composite Blocks

Fracture Toughness, Flexural Strength, and Flexural Modulus of New CAD/CAM Resin Composite Blocks

Self-Etch Silane Primer: Reactivity and Bonding with a Lithium Disilicate Ceramic

Evaluation of mechanical properties of CAD/CAM ceramic systems: literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About