Purpose: To compare the fracture load and failure mode of the monolithic lithium disilicate crown (e.max group) and 2 types of veneered zirconia crowns, hand layer (ZV group) and heat pressed (ZP group), as a posterior implant-supported restoration.

Methods: A total of 24 all-ceramic crowns for molar tooth were fabricated using the computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) system. The e.max group crowns and zirconia copings for ZV and ZP groups were fabricated using a Cerec milling unit. The ZV group was fabricated using a hand-layer veneering method, and the ZP group using a heat-pressing method. All crowns were luted to the abutments, which were connected to implant fixtures, using resin cement. Fracture load was measured using the universal testing machine, and the fracture surface was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy.

Results: The ZP group showed significantly higher fracture load (5229.3 N) compared with the e.max group (3852.1 N) and ZV group (3100.3 N). All fractures in the ZV group occurred in the veneered layer.

Conclusion: Monolithic CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns are applicable to posterior implant-supported restorations because the fracture load was higher than the average occlusal force.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e318278a576DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fracture load
20
lithium disilicate
12
emax group
12
group
10
monolithic cad/cam
8
cad/cam lithium
8
veneered zirconia
8
zirconia crowns
8
posterior implant-supported
8
crowns
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!