Validation of in-vitro tests of zirconia-ceramic inlay-retained fixed partial dentures: A finite element analysis

Waldecker, Moritz; Rues, Stefan; Rammelsberg, Peter; Bömicke, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2019.01.017

Cited by 11 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This calculation is not possible using another methodology available in the literature. This method has already been used to investigate RBFDP mechanical behavior and to determine the most stressed areas (Heintze et al, 2018, Baran et al, 2019, Waldecker et al, 2019. Therefore, the goal of this study was to compare the mechanical response of RBFDP made in zirconia, metal, lithium disilicate and composite resin cemented using different resin cements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the literature, class II restored teeth with indirect restorations present the highest stress peaks in the adhesive interface region(Ausiello et al, 2017). However, when this cavity is used to support a posterior RBFDP, the tensile stress concentration occurs in the conection with the pontic(Baran et al, 2018, Heintze et al, 2018, Waldecker et al, 2019. In this way, the results herein corroborate with previous papers when demonstrates that the connector region is the most stressed area for RBFDP and with paper with conventional Class II restorations exhibiting stress concentration in the adhesive interface.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Short communication: Influence of restorative material and cement on the stress distribution of posterior resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: 3D finite element analysis

Tribst

Melo

Bottino

et al. 2019

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this study was to compare the mechanical response of resin-bonded fixed dental prosthesis (RBFDP) made in zirconia, metal, lithium disilicate and composite resin cemented using resin cements with different elastic modulus. For the finite element analysis, a three-dimensional model of partial right maxilla was used to create a model with edentulous space in the second premolar and the cavity's preparation on the first pre-molar and first molar to receive a RBFDP. The model was imported to the analysis software in which they were divided into mesh composed by nodes (371,101) and tetrahedral elements (213,673). Each material was considered isotropic, elastic and homogeneous. No-separation contacts were considered between restoration/resin cement and resin cement/tooth. For all other structures the contacts were considered ideal. The model fixation occurred at the base of the bone and an axial load of 300 N was applied on the pontic occlusal surface. To simulate polymerization shrinkage effects on the cement, the thermal expansion approach was used. The displacement and maximum principal stress (in MPa) were selected as failure criteria. The prosthesis made in composite resin showed higher displacement, while in zirconia showed higher stress concentration. Tensile stress between restoration/cement, cement and cement/cavity was directly proportional to the restorative material's elastic modulus. The more rigid cement increases the tensile zones in the cement layer but decreases the stress between prosthesis and cement. The molar cavity showed higher stress concentration between restoration/cement than the preparation in the pre-molar tooth. The use of composite resin for the manufacturing of RBFDP increases the displacement of the set during the loading. However, it reduces the amount of stress concentration at the adhesive interface in comparison with the other materials.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Short communication: Influence of restorative material and cement on the stress distribution of posterior resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: 3D finite element analysis

Tribst

Melo

Bottino

et al. 2019

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To improve the findings of in vitro tests, finite-element analysis (FEA) can be used to complement these results [31]. FEA provides a simulation of the behavior of various materials, methodologies, and designs numerically in terms of displacement and stress distribution with various loading conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical behavior of posterior metal-free cantilever fixed dental prostheses: effect of material and retainer design

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To study the fracture resistance and stress distribution pattern of translucent zirconia and fiber-reinforced composite cantilever resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RPFDPs) with two retainer designs. Materials and methods Forty human mandibular molars were divided into two groups according to the retainer design. The restorations included a premolar pontic and 2 retainer designs: (D1) inlay ring retainer and (D2) lingual coverage retainer. Each main group was then divided according to the material used (n = 10): zirconia (Z) or fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) (F). Restorations were cemented using dual polymerizing adhesive luting resin. All specimens were thermo-cycled (5–55 °C for 10,000 cycles), then subjected to dynamic loading (50 N, 240,000, and 1.6 Hz) and fracture resistance test. The finite element analysis includes the two models of retainer designs used in the in vitro test. Modified von Mises stress values on enamel, dentin, luting resin, and restorations were examined when the restorations failed. Results A significantly higher failure load was recorded for zirconia groups (505.00 ± 61.50 and 548.00 ± 75.63 N for D1Z and D2Z, respectively) than for FRC groups (345.00 ± 42.33 and 375.10 ± 53.62 N for D1F and D2F, respectively) (P = 0.001). With regard to failure mode, D2 showed a more favorable failure pattern than D1. Model D2 resulted in lower stresses in tooth structure than model D1, and zirconia transmitted more stresses to the tooth structure than FRC. Conclusions The lingual coverage retainer (D2) enhanced the biomechanical performance of the restoration/tooth complex. Considering the failure mode and tooth stress, FRC is a promising treatment option when constructing a cantilever RPFDP. Clinical relevance Dentists should be aware of the biomechanical behavior during the selection of the material and for the replacement of a single missing mandibular premolar tooth with minimally invasive RBFDP.

show abstract

“…13 Several laboratory studies concluded that inlay-retained FPDs is a promising design for replacing single premolars or molars with fracture resistance higher than that required for posterior restorations. [14][15][16] As for clinical studies, high failure rates were observed with lithium disilicate ceramic or veneered zirconia. [17][18][19] However, monolithic zirconia and high performance polymers showed encouraging results as a viable treatment option with up to 8 years observational period.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of a fracture, they may be repaired intraorally with durable results 13 . Several laboratory studies concluded that inlay‐retained FPDs is a promising design for replacing single premolars or molars with fracture resistance higher than that required for posterior restorations 14–16 . As for clinical studies, high failure rates were observed with lithium disilicate ceramic or veneered zirconia 17–19 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Different Preparation Depths for an Inlay‐Retained Fixed Partial Denture on the Accuracy of Different Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study

Khaled

Sabet

Ebeid

et al. 2021

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The aim was to evaluate the effect of different preparation depths for inlay‐retained fixed partial dentures on the accuracy of intraoral scanners. Materials and Methods Tooth preparations for two inlay‐retained fixed partial dentures were done and divided according to depth of the preparation. Group A: 2 mm pulpal floor depth, 3 mm gingival floor depth and Group B: 3 mm pulpal floor depth, 4mm gingival floor depth. The CEREC Omnicam 4.4.4, Omnicam 4.6.2. Trios3 and Medit i500 intraoral scanners were used in this study. Tooth preparations were scanned by each scanner 10 times. The STL files obtained from the intraoral scanners were compared to the reference models (trueness) and within each test group (precision) using a 3D comparison software. Data were then statistically analyzed. Results Regarding trueness, two‐way ANOVA revealed significant differences between the different types of scanners (p < 0.001) (Omnicam 4.4.4: 65.09 ± 2.87 Omnicam 4.6.1: 52.73 ± 3.31 Medit i500: 58.45 ± 2.63 Trios 3: 41.79 ± 4.42). Preparation depth had no significant influence on the trueness (p = 0.083). For precision two‐way ANOVA revealed significant differences between the different types of scanners (p < 0.001). Preparation depth had no significant influence on the precision (p = 0.111). Statistically significant interactions were found between the different variables. Conclusions The depth of preparation did not have an influence on the accuracy of different scanners. However, the type of scanner influenced the accuracy of digital impressions with Trios3 showing the highest accuracy.

show abstract

Validation of in-vitro tests of zirconia-ceramic inlay-retained fixed partial dentures: A finite element analysis

Cited by 11 publications

References 31 publications

Short communication: Influence of restorative material and cement on the stress distribution of posterior resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: 3D finite element analysis

Short communication: Influence of restorative material and cement on the stress distribution of posterior resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: 3D finite element analysis

Biomechanical behavior of posterior metal-free cantilever fixed dental prostheses: effect of material and retainer design

Effect of Different Preparation Depths for an Inlay‐Retained Fixed Partial Denture on the Accuracy of Different Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About