Effect of cavity preparation design and ceramic type on the stress distribution, strain and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM onlays in molars

Vianna, Ana Luíza Serralha de Velloso; Prado, Célio Jesus do; Bicalho, Aline Arêdes; Pereira, Renata; Neves, Flávio Domingues das; Soares, Carlos José

doi:10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0004

Cited by 34 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Vianna et al also investigated lithium disilicate ceramic, comparing the fracture resistance of 24 molars restored with onlays, evaluated with a universal testing machine (DL2000, EMIC, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil). The mean fracture resistance was 2603.85 ± 617.1 N [23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fracture Resistance of Partial Indirect Restorations Made With CAD/CAM Technology. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Amesti-Garaizabal

Agustín-Panadero

Verdejo-Solá

et al. 2019

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the fracture resistance and survival rate of partial indirect restorations inlays, onlays, and overlays fabricated using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology from ceramics, composite resin, resin nanoceramic, or hybrid ceramic and to analyze the influence of proximal box elevation on fracture resistance. Materials and methods: This systematic review was based on guidelines proposed by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). An electronic search was conducted in databases US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Embase. In vitro trials published during the last 10 years were included in the review. Results: Applying inclusion criteria based on the review’s population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question, 13 articles were selected. Meta-analysis by restoration type estimated the fracture resistance of inlays to be 1923.45 Newtons (N); of onlays 1644 N and of overlays 1383.6 N. Meta-analysis by restoration material obtained an estimated fracture resistance for ceramic of 1529.5 N, for composite resin of 1600 Ne, for resin nanoceramic 2478.7 N, and hybrid ceramic 2108 N. Conclusions: Resin nanoceramic inlays present significantly higher fracture resistance values. Proximal box elevation does not exert any influence on the fracture resistance of indirect restorations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Vianna, in the same trial, measured the fracture resistance of 24 leucite-reinforced ceramic onlays, obtaining a mean value of 1693.1 ± 465.45 N [23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Resistance of Partial Indirect Restorations Made With CAD/CAM Technology. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Amesti-Garaizabal

Agustín-Panadero

Verdejo-Solá

et al. 2019

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study followed a 3 × 2 factorial design, considering the factors' preparation design: non-retentive adhesive preparation (nRET) [29], traditional all-ceramic onlay preparation with occlusal isthmus reduction (IST) [42], and traditional all-ceramic onlay preparation without occlusal isthmus reduction (wIST) [28,42]; and the onlay restorative material: lithium-disilicate (LD) and CAD-CAM nanoceramic resin (NR) (Figure 1). of restorative treatments with preparations without emphasis on the retention method were promising, recommending more and more the importance of the conservation of the remaining healthy dental structure [28], both for resin and ceramic restorations [10,11].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical Behavior of Different Restorative Materials and Onlay Preparation Designs in Endodontically Treated Molars

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the effect of the combination of three different onlay preparation designs and two restorative materials on the stress distribution, using 3D-finite element analysis. Six models of first lower molars were created according to three preparation designs: non-retentive (nRET), traditional with occlusal isthmus reduction (IST), and traditional without occlusal isthmus reduction (wIST); and according to two restorative materials: lithium-disilicate (LD) and nanoceramic resin (NR). A 600 N axial load was applied at the central fossa. All solids were considered isotropic, homogeneous, and linearly elastic. A static linear analysis was performed, and the Maximum Principal Stress (MPS) criteria were used to evaluate the results and compare the stress in MPa on the restoration, cement layer, and tooth structure (enamel and dentin). A novel statistical approach was used for quantitative analysis of the finite element analysis results. On restoration and cement layer, nRET showed a more homogeneous stress distribution, while the highest stress peaks were calculated for LD onlays (restoration: 69–110; cement layer: 10.2–13.3). On the tooth structure, the material had more influence, with better results for LD (27–38). It can be concluded that nRET design showed the best mechanical behavior compared to IST and wIST, with LD being more advantageous for tooth structure and NR for the restoration and cement layer.

show abstract

“…In the posterior sites, LS 2 can be successfully employed for resin-bonded single restorations, like inlays, onlays, non-retentive partial crowns and full coverage table-tops, in the monolithic form. The material offers undisputable advantages, like high fracture resistance, showed by high load-at-fracture values in table-tops/occlusal veneers, allowing reduced thickness of the restorations (1-1.5 mm), low wear and abrasive potential, adhesive bonding strength and high biocompatibility, properties that are very favourable when teeth are severely abraded or a heavy occlusal correction is needed (like in lateral postorthodontic open bite) [10,[81][82][83][84][85]. These restorative solutions have shown favourable clinical outcomes in the most recent literature, even though with limited follow-up [86,87].…”

Section: Clinical Indications and Performancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current status on lithium disilicate and zirconia: a narrative review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The introduction of the new generation of particle-filled and high strength ceramics, hybrid composites and technopolymers in the last decade has offered an extensive palette of dental materials broadening the clinical indications in fixed prosthodontics, in the light of minimally invasive dentistry dictates. Moreover, last years have seen a dramatic increase in the patients' demand for non-metallic materials, sometimes induced by metal-phobia or alleged allergies. Therefore, the attention of scientific research has been progressively focusing on such materials, particularly on lithium disilicate and zirconia, in order to shed light on properties, indications and limitations of the new protagonists of the prosthetic scene. Methods: This article is aimed at providing a narrative review regarding the state-of-the-art in the field of these popular ceramic materials, as to their physical-chemical, mechanical and optical properties, as well as to the proper dental applications, by means of scientific literature analysis and with reference to the authors' clinical experience. Results: A huge amount of data, sometimes conflicting, is available today. Both in vitro and in vivo studies pointed out the outstanding peculiarities of lithium disilicate and zirconia: unparalleled optical and esthetic properties, together with high biocompatibility, high mechanical resistance, reduced thickness and favorable wear behavior have been increasingly orientating the clinicians' choice toward such ceramics. Conclusions: The noticeable properties and versatility make lithium disilicate and zirconia materials of choice for modern prosthetic dentistry, requiring high esthetic and mechanical performances combined with a minimal invasive approach, so that the utilization of such metal-free ceramics has become more and more widespread over time.

show abstract

Effect of cavity preparation design and ceramic type on the stress distribution, strain and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM onlays in molars

Cited by 34 publications

References 33 publications

Fracture Resistance of Partial Indirect Restorations Made With CAD/CAM Technology. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Fracture Resistance of Partial Indirect Restorations Made With CAD/CAM Technology. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Mechanical Behavior of Different Restorative Materials and Onlay Preparation Designs in Endodontically Treated Molars

Current status on lithium disilicate and zirconia: a narrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About