The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of preparation design on fracture resistance of different monolithic zirconia crowns: A comparative study

  • Findakly, Meelad Basil (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Mustansiriyah University) ;
  • Jasim, Haider Hasan (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Mustansiriyah University)
  • Received : 2019.07.03
  • Accepted : 2019.12.11
  • Published : 2019.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance and modes of fracture of monolithic zirconia crowns with two preparation designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Forty human maxillary first premolar teeth were extracted for orthodontic purposes and divided into two main groups (n=20): Group A: monolithic traditional zirconia; Group B: monolithic translucent zirconia. The groups were further subdivided into two subgroups (n=10): (A1, B1) shoulder margin design; (A2, B2) feather-edge margin design. Teeth were prepared with either a 1 mm shoulder margin design or a feather-edge margin design. The prepared teeth were scanned using a digital intraoral scanner. The crowns were cemented using self-adhesive resin cement. All cemented teeth were stored in water for 7 days and thermocycling was done before testing. All samples were subjected to compressive axial loading until fracture. The fractographic analysis was done to assess the modes of fracture of the tested samples. RESULTS. The highest mean values of fracture resistance were recorded in kilo-newton and were in the order of subgroup A1 (2.903); subgroup A2 (2.3); subgroup B1 (1.854) and subgroup B2 (1.523). One-way ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference among the 4 subgroups. Concerning modes of fracture, the majority of samples in subgroups A1 and B1 were fracture of restoration and/or tooth, while in subgroups A2 and B2, the majority of samples fractured through the central fossa. CONCLUSION. Even though all the tested crowns fractured at a higher level than the maximum occlusal forces, the shoulder margin design was better than the feather-edge margin design and the monolithic traditional zirconia was better than the monolithic translucent zirconia in terms of fracture strength.

Keywords

References

  1. Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Gueth JF, Edelhoff D, Naumann M. In vitro performance of full-contour zirconia single crowns. Dent Mater 2012;28:449-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.024
  2. Zhang Y, Kelly JR. Dental Ceramics for Restoration and Metal Veneering. Dent Clin North Am 2017;61:797-819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.005
  3. Monaco C, Caldari M, Scotti R; AIOP Clinical Research Group. Clinical evaluation of 1,132 zirconia-based single crowns: a retrospective cohort study from the AIOP clinical research group. Int J Prosthodont 2013;26:435-42. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3099
  4. Zhang Y. Making yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia translucent. Dent Mater 2014;30:1195-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.08.375
  5. de Lima E, Meira JBC, Özcan M, Cesar PF. Chipping of veneering ceramics in zirconium dioxide fixed dental prosthesis. Curr Oral Health Rep 2015;2:169-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40496-015-0066-7
  6. Mitov G, Anastassova-Yoshida Y, Nothdurft FP, von See C, Pospiech P. Influence of the preparation design and artificial aging on the fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia crowns. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:30-6. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.1.30
  7. Johansson C, Kmet G, Rivera J, Larsson C, Vult Von Steyern P. Fracture strength of monolithic all-ceramic crowns made of high translucent yttrium oxide-stabilized zirconium dioxide compared to porcelain-veneered crowns and lithium disilicate crowns. Acta Odontol Scand 2014;72:145-53. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2013.822098
  8. Vichi A, Sedda M, Fabian Fonzar R, Carrabba M, Ferrari M. Comparison of contrast ratio, translucency parameter, and flexural strength of traditional and "Augmented translucency" zirconia for CEREC CAD/CAM system. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016;28:S32-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12172
  9. Schmitt J, Wichmann M, Holst S, Reich S. Restoring severely compromised anterior teeth with zirconia crowns and featheredged margin preparations: a 3-year follow-up of a prospective clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:107-9.
  10. Poggio CE, Dosoli R, Ercoli C. A retrospective analysis of 102 zirconia single crowns with knife-edge margins. J Prosthet Dent 2012;107:316-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60083-3
  11. Schmitz JH, Cortellini D, Granata S, Valenti M. Monolithic lithium disilicate complete single crowns with feather-edge preparation design in the posterior region: A multicentric retrospective study up to 12 years. Quintessence Int 2017:601-8. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a29702
  12. Patroni S, Chiodera G, Caliceti C, Ferrari P. CAD/CAM technology and zirconium oxide with feather-edge marginal preparation. Eur J Esthet Dent 2010;5:78-100.
  13. Reich S, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. The effect of finish line preparation and layer thickness on the failure load and fractography of ZrO2 copings. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:369-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60085-2
  14. Dentsply Sirona. In fire HTC speed. Operating instructions. 2017. https://manuals.sirona.com/home.HomeDmsDocument.download.html?id=20054.
  15. Burke FJ. Maximising the fracture resistance of dentinebonded all-ceramic crowns. J Dent 1999;27:169-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(98)00050-5
  16. Ramos RM, Clark D, Mazza M, Venuti P, Maiolino M, Kopanja S, Cirimpei V, Tawfik AA, Bordonali D, Acatrinei B, Sutradhar JC, Czerwinski M, Sienkiewicz A, Khademi J. The shoulderless approach a new rationale in prosthetic dentistry. Tomorrow Tooth J 2017;1:1-29.
  17. Church TD, Jessup JP, Guillory VL, Vandewalle KS. Translucency and strength of high-translucency monolithic zirconium oxide materials. Gen Dent 2017;65:48-52.
  18. Lawson NC, Burgess JO. Dental ceramics: a current review. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2014;35:161-6.
  19. Jang GW, Kim HS, Choe HC, Son MK. Fracture strength and mechanism of dental ceramic crown with zirconia thickness. Procedia Eng 2011;10:1556-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.260
  20. Wu XP, Li DS, Zhang J, Ma X, Zhao K, Zhang XP. Effects of different die materials on fracture and failure behaviors of all-ceramic crowns. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2009;44:483-7.
  21. Yucel MT, Yondem I, Aykent F, Eraslan O. Influence of the supporting die structures on the fracture strength of all-ceramic materials. Clin Oral Investig 2012;16:1105-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0606-z
  22. Chitmongkolsuk S, Heydecke G, Stappert C, Strub JR. Fracture strength of all-ceramic lithium disilicate and porcelain-fused-to-metal bridges for molar replacement after dynamic loading. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2002;10:15-22.
  23. Dolidze T, Bitarova I. Advantages and disadvantages of E-max and Zirconia crowns. Eur Sci J 2017;12:465-8.
  24. Skjold A, Schriwer C, Oilo M. Effect of margin design on fracture load of zirconia crowns. Eur J Oral Sci 2019;127:89-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12593
  25. ISO/TR 11405. Dental materials - Guidance on testing of adhesion to tooth structure. International Standards Organization (ISO); Geneva; Switzerland, 1994. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/19347.html
  26. Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Edelhoff D, Gernet W. Effect of preparation design on the fracture resistance of zirconia crown copings. Dent Mater J 2008;27:362-7. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.27.362
  27. Miura S, Kasahara S, Yamauchi S, Egusa H. Effect of finish line design on stress distribution in bilayer and monolithic zirconia crowns: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study. Eur J Oral Sci 2018;126:159-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12402
  28. Jalalian E, Rostami R, Atashkar B. Comparison of chamfer and deep chamfer preparation designs on the fracture resistance of zirconia core restorations. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2011;5:41-5.
  29. Sun T, Zhou S, Lai R, Liu R, Ma S, Zhou Z, Longquan S. Load-bearing capacity and the recommended thickness of dental monolithic zirconia single crowns. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2014;35:93-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.03.014
  30. Lang NP, Kiel RA, Anderhalden K. Clinical and microbiological effects of subgingival restorations with overhanging or clinically perfect margins. J Clin Periodontol 1983;10:563-78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1983.tb01295.x
  31. Rekow ED, Harsono M, Janal M, Thompson VP, Zhang G. Factorial analysis of variables influencing stress in all-ceramic crowns. Dent Mater 2006;22:125-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.04.010
  32. Shahrbaf S, van Noort R, Mirzakouchaki B, Ghassemieh E, Martin N. Fracture strength of machined ceramic crowns as a function of tooth preparation design and the elastic modulus of the cement. Dent Mater 2014;30:234-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.11.010
  33. Sornsuwan T, Ellakwa A, Swain MV. Occlusal geometrical considerations in all-ceramic pre-molar crown failure testing. Dent Mater 2011;27:1127-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.08.005
  34. Nakamura K, Harada A, Inagaki R, Kanno T, Niwano Y, Milleding P, Ortengren U. Fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia molar crowns with reduced thickness. Acta Odontol Scand 2015;73:602-8. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2015.1007479