On the assignment of quartz-like LiAlSi2O6 - SiO2 solid solutions in dental lithium silicate glass-ceramics: Virgilite, high quartz, low quartz or stuffed quartz derivatives?

Influence of occlusal thickness on the fracture resistance of chairside milled lithium disilicate posterior full-coverage single-unit prostheses containing virgilite: A comparative in vitro study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the fracture resistance of chairside computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) lithium disilicate mandibular posterior crowns with virgilite of different occlusal thicknesses and compare them to traditional lithium disilicate crowns.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-five chairside CAD-CAM crowns were fabricated for mandibular right first molars, 60 from novel lithium disilicate with virgilite (CEREC Tessera, Dentsply Sirona), and 15 from traditional lithium disilicate (e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent). These crowns were distributed across five groups based on occlusal thickness and material: Group 1 featured CEREC Tessera crowns with 0.8 mm thickness, Group 2 had 1.0 mm thickness, Group 3 had 1.2 mm thickness, Group 4 with 1.5 mm thickness, and Group 5 included e.max CAD crowns with 1.0 mm thickness. These crowns were luted onto 3D-printed resin dies using Multilink Automix resin cement (Ivoclar Vivadent). Subsequently, they underwent cyclic loading (2,000,000 cycles at 1 Hz with a 275 N force) and loading until fracture. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) assessed the fractured specimens. Statistical analysis involved one-way ANOVA and the Kruskal-Wallis Test (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Fracture resistance varied significantly (<0.001) across mandibular molar crowns fabricated from chairside CAD-CAM lithium disilicate containing virgilite, particularly between crowns with 0.8 mm and those with 1.2 and 1.5 mm occlusal thickness. However, no significant differences were found when comparing crowns with 1, 1.2, and 1.5 mm thicknesses. CEREC Tessera crowns with 1.5 mm thickness exhibited the highest resistance (2119 N/mm2), followed by those with 1.2 mm (1982 N/mm2), 1.0 mm (1763 N/mm2), and 0.8 mm (1144 N/mm2) thickness, whereas e.max CAD crowns with 1.0 mm occlusal thickness displayed the lowest resistance (814 N/mm2).

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between thickness and fracture resistance in the virgilite lithium disilicate full-coverage crowns was directly proportional, indicating that increased thickness corresponded to higher fracture resistance. No significant differences were noted among crowns with thicknesses ranging from 1 to 1.5 mm. This novel ceramic exhibited superior fracture resistance compared to traditional lithium disilicate.

Advanced lithium disilicate: A comparative evaluation of translucency and fatigue failure load to other ceramics for monolithic restorations

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the surface roughness, translucency, fatigue failure load (FFL), and number of cycles for fatigue failure (CFF) of a recently released lithia-based material called advanced lithium disilicate and three other ceramics indicated for monolithic restorations. First, ALD (advanced lithium disilicate, CEREC Tessera, Dentsply Sirona), LD (lithium disilicate, IPS e. max CAD, Ivoclar), LS (lithium silicate-disilicate, Suprinity, Vita Zahnfabrik), and 4Y-PSZ (Yttria-stabilized zirconia, IPS e.max ZirCAD MT, Ivoclar) discs (n = 15, Ø = 10 mm and thickness = 1.0 mm) were fabricated from CAD/CAM blocks/discs, A2 shade. The discs were sintered/crystallized and subsequently analyzed by a rugosimeter (Mitutoyo SJ-410) to determine Ra and Rz surface roughness parameters. Next, they were evaluated to determine the translucency parameter (TP) using a bench-top spectrophotometer (SP60, EX-Rite). The discs were subsequently cemented to glass fiber epoxy resin discs, and the specimens were tested under cyclic loading (Step-test), immersed in distilled water at a frequency of 20 Hz, with an initial cyclic load of 200 N for 5,000 cycles and increments of 50 N every 10,000 cycles until failure. Fatigue failure load (FFL) and number of cycles for fatigue failure (CFF) were recorded for subsequent Kaplan Meier analysis, with post-hoc Mantel-Cox and Weibull analysis (α = 0.05). Complementary fractographic, topographic and energy dispersive spectroscopy analyses (EDS) were performed. 4Y-PSZ showed higher survival (p < 0.05), with higher FFL and CFF (1077 N; 180,333 cycles), followed by LD (980 N; 161,000 cycles), LS (937 N; 152,333 cycles) and ALD (910 N; 147,000 cycles). No differences were observed between the tested groups regarding Weibull modulus. ALD presented TP (28.14) equal to DL (28.27) and higher than LS (25.51). All lithia-based materials had higher translucency than 4Y-PSZ (TP = 8.62) (p < 0.05). ALD appears to have a similar elemental composition to LD and LSD for oxygen and silicon. ALD and LSD have a similar zirconium content. Fractures originated on the cemented surface of the ceramic discs. Lithia-based ceramics showed lower surface roughness, with ALD (Ra = 0.04 μm; Rz = 0.66 μm) showing the lowest values (p < 0.05). Despite showing lower FFL when compared to LD and 4Y-PSZ, ALD has compatible translucency and mechanical fatigue performance with its indication for fabricating monolithic, anterior and posterior adhesively cemented single-unit restorations. However, further studies are needed to substantiate its clinical performance.

Does glaze firing affect the strength of advanced lithium disilicate after simulated defects?

OBJECTIVE

To study the influence of glazing on strength repair of lithium disilicate glass-ceramics after defect incorporation in different production processing phases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bar-shaped specimens (1 × 1 × 12 mm, n = 280; 20/group) made from different lithium disilicate ceramics (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar, "LD" or advanced lithium disilicate CEREC Tessera, Dentsply Sirona, "ALD") were exposed to 7 different protocols: crystallized without (c) and with glaze layer (cg), with a defect incorporated before crystallization without (ic) and with glaze layer (icg), with a defect after crystallization without (ci) or with glaze layer (cig), and defect incorporated after the glaze layer (cgi). The flexural strength was determined using the three-point bending test. Analysis of indented areas and fractured specimens was performed by scanning electron microscopy. Flexural strength data were evaluated by two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey tests (α = 5%).

RESULTS

Two-way ANOVA revealed a significant influence of ceramic (p < 0.001; F = 55.45), protocol (p < 0.001; F = 56.94), and the interaction protocol*ceramic (p < 0.001; F = 13.86). Regardless of ceramics, defect incorporation as final step resulted in the worst strength, while defects introduced before crystallization did not reduce strength. Glaze firing after defect incorporation led to strength repair for ALD, whereas such an effect was not evident for LD.

CONCLUSIONS

The advanced lithium disilicate must receive a glaze layer to achieve its highest strength. Defects incorporated in the pre-crystallized stage can be healed during crystallization. Defects should not be incorporated after glazing.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinical adjustments should be performed on pre-crystallized or crystalized restorations that receive a glazer layer afterwards.

Surface properties and flexural fatigue strength of an advanced lithium disilicate

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface properties and fatigue mechanical behavior of an advanced lithium disilicate ceramic in comparison to lithium disilicate and zirconia. First, discs (n = 15, diameter = 13.5 mm and thickness = 1.2 mm) were made from the following materials: 4Y-PSZ - 4% mol yttria-stabilized zirconia (IPS e.max ZirCAD A2); LD - lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD); ALD - advanced lithium disilicate (CEREC Tessera). The specimens were crystalized/sintered and subsequently analyzed by a rugosimeter (Mitutoyo SJ-410) to determine surface roughness (parameters Ra and Rz). Specimens were subjected to biaxial flexural fatigue testing using the step-test method (20 Hz; 10,000 cycles per step; initial stress of 200 MPa; and step size of 25 MPa) until specimen fracture. Statistical analyses included Shapiro-Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis, and post-hoc tests for roughness data, while survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier and Mantel-Cox) and reliability analysis (Weibull modulus) were applied to flexural fatigue strength data. Hardness (Vickers) results were submitted to analysis of variance (1-way ANOVA) and Tukey's test. Zirconia (4Y-PSZ) showed higher FFS, CFF (467 MPa and 115216 cycles) and survival compared to the other materials. ALD had the lowest FFS, CFF (215 MPa and 11,908 cycles) and survival. ALD showed lower Weibull modulus (m = 6.63 for FFS; m = 1.27 for CFF) than LD for FFS (m = 17.33), and lower than LD (m = 4.64) and 4Y-PSZ (m = 6.69) for CFF. ALD showed the lowest Ra (0.07 μm) and Rz (1.05 μm) values, while 4Y-PSZ (Ra = 0.22 μm; Rz = 1.91 μm) and LD (Ra = 0.21 μm; Rz = 2.17 μm) showed higher and similar values. Zirconia (4-YPSZ) was the hardest material, while lithia-based ceramics (LD and ALD) presented the lowest and similar hardness values. Fractures originated in surface defects in the tensile stress concentration region. ALD has lower flexural fatigue strength compared to the other tested materials, along with higher variability (lower structural reliability).

Effect of glazing technique and firing on surface roughness and flexural strength of an advanced lithium disilicate

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of glazing technique and firing on the surface roughness and flexural strength of an advanced lithium disilicate (ALD) and lithium disilicate (LD).

METHODS

Eight groups of bar-shaped specimens (1 mm × 1 mm × 12 mm, N=160, 20/group) were manufactured from ALD (CEREC Tessera, Dentsply Sirona) and LD (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar). The specimens were then submitted to various posttreatments: crystallization (c), crystallization followed by a second firing (c-r), crystallization with glaze in one step (cg), and crystallization followed by a glaze layer firing (c-g). Surface roughness was measured by means of a profilometer, and flexural strength was determined using a three-point bending test. Surface morphology, fractography, and crack healing analysis were conducted using scanning electron microscopy.

RESULTS

Refiring (c-r) did not affect the surface roughness (Ra) while applying glaze at both cg and c-g procedures increased the roughness. ALDc-g (442.3 ± 92.5 MPa) promoted higher strength than ALDcg (282.1 ± 64.4 MPa), whereas LDcg (402.9 ± 78.4 MPa) was stronger than LDc-g (255.5 ± 68.7 MPa). Refiring completely closed the crack in ALD, but it had a limited effect on LD.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-step crystallization and glazing improved ALD strength compared to the one-step protocol. Refiring and one-step glazing do not increase LD's strength, while two-step glazing has a negative effect.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Besides both materials being lithium-disilicate glass ceramics, the glazing technique and firing protocol affected their roughness and flexural strength differently. A two-step crystallization and glazing should be the first choice for ALD, while for LD, glazing is optional and when necessary, should be applied in one-step.