Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2024
Fracture resistance of chairside CAD-CAM lithium disilicate occlusal veneer with various designs after mechanical aging.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jurado Carlos A, Tsujimoto Akimasa, Molisani Joseph, Fu Chin-Chuan, Sadid-Zadeh Ramtin
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the fracture resistance of chairside computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) lithium disilicate crown, onlay, and non-anatomical occlusal veneer (A-OV) with and without margin fabricated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations were designed as (1) complete coverage crown (CCC); (2) A-OV with margin; (3) non-A-OV with margin (NA-OV-M); and (4) non-A-OV without margin (NA-OV-NM), 16 of each. Restorations were crystallized and adhesively luted to resin dies using resin cement. Specimens were then subjected to 400,000 cycles of chewing in a mastication simulator. A universal testing machine was used to apply a compressive load at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min to the long axis of the tooth with a stainless-steel sphere until fracture occurred. One-way ANOVA followed by post hoc tests were used to assess the impact of preparation design on the fracture load of CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations.
RESULTS: The highest fracture load was recorded for CAD-CAM lithium disilicate indirect restorations for non-A-OVs preparation with margin (2549 ± 428 N) and onlay (2549 ± 293 N) and the lowest fracture load was recorded for CCCs (2389 ± 428 N); however, there was no significant (p = 0.640) between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations fabricated for anatomical and non-A-OV preparation display a fracture resistance similar to CCCs. Conservative partial coverage restorations may be considered an acceptable approach for posterior teeth.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations were designed as (1) complete coverage crown (CCC); (2) A-OV with margin; (3) non-A-OV with margin (NA-OV-M); and (4) non-A-OV without margin (NA-OV-NM), 16 of each. Restorations were crystallized and adhesively luted to resin dies using resin cement. Specimens were then subjected to 400,000 cycles of chewing in a mastication simulator. A universal testing machine was used to apply a compressive load at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min to the long axis of the tooth with a stainless-steel sphere until fracture occurred. One-way ANOVA followed by post hoc tests were used to assess the impact of preparation design on the fracture load of CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations.
RESULTS: The highest fracture load was recorded for CAD-CAM lithium disilicate indirect restorations for non-A-OVs preparation with margin (2549 ± 428 N) and onlay (2549 ± 293 N) and the lowest fracture load was recorded for CCCs (2389 ± 428 N); however, there was no significant (p = 0.640) between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: CAD-CAM lithium disilicate restorations fabricated for anatomical and non-A-OV preparation display a fracture resistance similar to CCCs. Conservative partial coverage restorations may be considered an acceptable approach for posterior teeth.