Fracture Resistance of Lithium Disilicate Ceramics Bonded to Enamel or Dentin Using Different Resin Cement Types and Film Thicknesses

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thitithorn Rojpaibool ◽  
Chalermpol Leevailoj
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (23) ◽  
pp. 4094-4100
Author(s):  
Yasmine El Makawi ◽  
Nagwa Khattab

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of lithium disilicate endocrowns compared to prefabricated zirconia crown used for restoring pulpotomized primary molars, on their Fracture Resistance and to compare the loads to failure these different ceramic restorations with previously reported posterior occlusal forces. METHODS: Twenty mandibular left second primary molars were randomly distributed into two groups (n = 10 in each group) the zirconia Crown (Nusmile zr.) Group (G1) and the lithium disilicate (IPS e.max Press) Endocrown Group (G2). In all groups pulpotomy procedure was done before preparation then each sample was prepared based on their allocated restoration, both zirconia crown (Nusmile zr.) and endocrown (IPS e.max Press) were cemented by dual-cure resin cement. All samples were loaded to failure using a universal testing machine (Instron, USA), and the compressive force was applied. The data were analysed using one-way (ANOVA) and Tukey’s post hoc significance difference tests. Differences were considered significant at (p< 0.05). RESULTS: Group zirconia crown (G1) showed significantly higher fracture strength than Group (G2) lithium disilicate endocrown (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The zirconia crown showed higher fracture resistance than lithium disilicate endocrown. However, both tested zirconia crown and lithium disilicate endocrown withstood the application of axial occlusal forces greater than the reference values for posterior occlusal loads.


Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (19) ◽  
pp. 5603
Author(s):  
Amal Abdelsamad Sakrana ◽  
Walid Al-Zordk ◽  
Heba El-Sebaey ◽  
Ahmed Elsherbini ◽  
Mutlu Özcan

This paper assesses the impact of preheating of adhesive cement on the fracture resistance of lithium disilicate and zirconia restorations. Methods: A total of 80 human maxillary premolar teeth were assigned into 8 groups (n = 10) according to material type (either lithium disilicate or zirconia) and type of resin cement (either LinkForce or Panavia SA) with preheating temperature at 54 °C or at room temperature (25 °C). Teeth were prepared and restored with either lithium disilicate or zirconia restorations. After cementation, specimens were thermal cycled (10,000 cycles, 5 °C̸55 °C), then load cycled for 240,000 cycles (50 N). Each specimen was statically loaded until fracture and the load (N) at fracture was recorded, then the failure mode was detected. Statistical analysis of data was performed (p ≤ 0.05). Results: There was no significant difference (p = 0.978) in fracture mean values between LinkForce and Panavia SA. Statistically significant difference (p = 0.001) was revealed between fracture resistance of lithium disilicate restorations cemented with LinkForce at 25 °C and at 54 °C; however there was no significant difference (p = 0.92) between the fracture resistance of lithium disilicate restorations cemented with Panavia SA used at 25 °C and at 54 °C. Regarding the interaction between ceramic material, cement type, and cement preheating, there was no significant effect (p > 0.05) in fracture resistance. The cement type does not influence the fracture resistance of ceramic restorations. Preheating of resin cement has negatively influenced the fracture resistance of all tested groups, except for lithium disilicate cemented using LinkForce cement.


2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahed M. Al-Wahadni ◽  
David L. Hussey ◽  
Nicholas Grey ◽  
Muhanad M. Hatamleh

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to investigate the fracture resistance of two types of ceramic crowns cemented with two different cements. Methods and Materials Forty premolar crowns were fabricated using lithium-disilicate (IPS Empress-2) and glass-infiltrated aluminium-oxide (In-Ceram) ceramic systems. The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10) with Group 1 (IPS Empress-2) and Group 2 (In-Ceram) cemented with glass ionomer cement. Group 3 (IPS Empress-2) and Group 4 (In-Ceram) were cemented with resin cement. Crowns were tested in a universal testing machine at a compressive-load speed of 10 mm/min. Fracture modes were grouped into five categories. One way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to detect statistical significances (p<0.05). Results The mean (SD) fracture resistance (Newtons) for Groups 1 to 4 were: 245.35 (82.69), 390.48 (67.03), 269.69 (10.33), and 418.36 (26.24). The cement type had no statistical significant effect (p>0.05) on fracture resistance within each ceramic system tested. In-Ceram crowns cemented with either glass ionomer or resin cements exhibited a statistically significantly higher fracture-resistance than IPS Empress-2 crowns (p<0.05). Minimal fracture in the test crowns was the common mode exhibited. Conclusion Fracture resistance of IPS Empress-2 and In-Ceram crowns was not affected by the type of cement used for luting. Clinical Significance Both In-Ceram and IPS Empress-2 crowns can be successfully luted with the cements tested with In-Ceram exhibiting higher fracture resistance than IPS Empress-2. Citation Al-Wahadni AM, Hussey DL, Grey N, Hatamleh MM. Fracture Resistance of Aluminium Oxide and Lithium Disilicate-based Crowns using Different Luting Cements: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009 March; (10)2:051-058.


Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 3102
Author(s):  
Rini Behera ◽  
Lora Mishra ◽  
Darshan Devang Divakar ◽  
Abdulaziz A. Al-Kheraif ◽  
Naomi Ranjan Singh ◽  
...  

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the one-year clinical performance of lithium disilicate (LD) and zirconium dioxide (ZrO2) class II inlay restorations. Thirty healthy individuals who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled for the study. The patients were randomly divided into two study groups (n = 15): LD (IPS e.max press) and ZrO2 (Dentcare Zirconia). In the ZrO2 group, the internal surfaces of the inlays were sandblasted and silanized with Monobond N (Ivoclar, Leichsteistein, Germany). In the LD group, the internal surfaces of the inlays were etched with 5% hydrofluoric acid. The ceramic inlays were cemented with self-cure resin cement (Multilink N). Clinical examinations were performed using modified United State Public Health Codes and Criteria (USPHS) after 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 6 months and 1 year. The one-year survival rate was evaluated. In total, one failure was observed in the ZrO2 group. The survival probability after 1 year for the ZrO2 inlays was 93%, and for the LD inlays was 100%, which was statistically insignificant. The differences between both groups for most USPHS criteria (except for colour match) were statistically insignificant. Within the imitations of the present study, the lithium disilicate- and zirconia dioxide-based inlays exhibited comparable clinical performances. However, the colour and translucency match was superior for the lithium disilicate restorations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
GC Lopes ◽  
J Perdigão ◽  
D Baptista ◽  
A Ballarin

SUMMARY Objective: To compare the effect of hydrofluoric acid (HF) vs self-etching ceramic primer on resin cement microshear bond strength (μSBS) and ultramorphology of lithium disilicate (LD) ceramic. Methods and Materials: LD (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) blocks (14×4×2 mm3) were polished to 1200 grit and assigned to nine groups (n=5): CON: control, no LD surface treatment; IVO: 5.0% HF (IPS Ceramic Etching Gel, Ivoclar Vivadent); VIT: 5.0% HF (Vita Ceramics Etch, VITA Zahnfabrik); FGM: 5.0% HF (Condac Porcelana, FGM); ULT: 9.0% HF (Porcelain Etch, Ultradent); PRM: 9.6% HF (Premier Porcelain Etch Gel, Premier); BIS: 9.5% HF (Porcelain Etchant, Bisco Inc); DEN: 10.0% HF (Condicionador de Porcelanas, Dentsply Brazil); and MEP: self-etching ceramic primer (Monobond Etch & Prime, Ivoclar Vivadent). For all HF groups and control, an MDP-containing silane solution (MB+, Monobond Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent) was applied on rinsing the HF gel and air drying. Three transparent matrices for each specimen were filled with light-cured resin cement (Variolink Veneer, Ivoclar Vivadent). After storage in water for 48 hours at 37°C, specimens were tested in shear mode to measure μSBS. Mode of failure was analyzed at 50×. Statistical analysis included one-way analysis of variance and the Duncan post hoc test (α=0.05). Thirty-six additional LD specimens were assigned to the same experimental groups (n=4) and observed under a field-emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM) at magnifications ranging from 10,000× to 100,000×. Results: IVO resulted in statistically higher mean μSBS than all the other groups. MEP resulted in statistically lower μSBS than all HF groups. The failure mode for MEP was predominantly adhesive. The most frequent failure mode for the HF groups was mixed. CON resulted in 100% pretesting failures. For FESEM, no retentive pattern was observed for CON specimens. MEP resulted in the least pronounced etching pattern, few areas around crystals exhibited a slight increase in retention pattern compared to the control group. All HF gels created microporosities on the LD surface with distinct etching patterns. VIT and DEN resulted in an LD ultramorphology that suggested overetching. Conclusions: HF etching followed by a silane solution resulted in higher bond strengths than a self-etching ceramic primer. Some HF gels may cause overetching of the LD intaglio surface.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Amjad Abu Hasna ◽  
Stephanie Semmelmann ◽  
Fernanda Alves Feitosa ◽  
Danilo De Souza Andrade ◽  
Franklin R Tay ◽  
...  

This study evaluated the effect of different surface treatments on the tensile bond strength between lithium disilicate glass-ceramics, resin cement, and dentin. Fifty truncated cone-shape glass-ceramics were divided into five groups (n = 10): G1, control: 10% hydrofluoric acid (HF); G2, Nd:YAG laser + silane; G3, Sil + Nd:YAG laser; G4, graphite + Nd:YAG laser + Sil; and G5, graphite + Sil + Nd:YAG laser. Fifty human third-molars were cut to cylindrical shape and polished to standardize the bonding surfaces. The glass-ceramic specimens were bonded to dentin with a dual-cured resin cement and stored in distilled water for 24 h at 37ºC. Tensile testing was performed on a universal testing machine (10 Kgf load cell at 1 mm/min) until failure. The bond strength values (mean ± SD) in MPa were G1 (9.4 ± 2.3), G2 (9.7 ± 2.0), G3 (6.7 ± 1.9), G4 (4.6 ± 1.1), and G5 (1.2 ± 0.3). Nd:YAG laser and HF improve the bond strength between lithium disilicate glass-ceramics, resin cement, and dentin. The application of a graphite layer prior to Nd:YAG laser irradiation negatively affects this bonding and presented inferior results.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. e211656
Author(s):  
Gabriela Alves de Cerqueira ◽  
Lais Sampaio Souza ◽  
Rafael Soares Gomes ◽  
Giselle Maria Marchi ◽  
Paula Mathias

Aim: This study evaluated the water sorption and solubility of a light-cured resin cement, under four thicknesses and four opacities of a lithium disilicate ceramic, also considering three light-emitting diode (LED) units. Methods: A total of 288 specimens of a resin cement (AllCem Veneer Trans – FGM) were prepared, 96 samples were light-cured by each of the three light curing units (Valo – Ultradent / Radii-Cal – SDI / Bluephase II – Ivoclar Vivadent), divided into 16 experimental conditions, according to the opacities of the ceramic: High Opacity (HO), Medium Opacity (MO), Low Translucency (LT), High Translucency (HT), and thicknesses (0.3, 0.8, 1.5, and 2.0 mm) (n = 6). The specimens were weighed at three different times: Mass M1 (after making the specimens), M2 (after 7 days of storage in water), and M3 (after dissection cycle), for calculating water sorption and solubility. Results: The higher thickness of the ceramic (2.0 mm) significantly increased the values of water sorption (44.0± 4.0) and solubility (7.8±0.6), compared to lower thicknesses. Also, the ceramic of higher opacity (HO) generated the highest values of sorption and solubility when compared to the other opacities, regardless of the thickness tested (ANOVA-3 factors / Tukey’s test, α = 0.05). There was no influence of light curing units. Conclusion: Higher thicknesses and opacities of the ceramic increased the water sorption and solubility of the tested light-cured resin cement.


2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petrina Gerogianni ◽  
Wen Lien ◽  
Despoina Bompolaki ◽  
Ronald Verrett ◽  
Stephan Haney ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document