Effect of Marginal Designs on Fracture Strength of High Translucency Monolithic Zirconia Crowns

Fracture Resistance of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Depending on Different Marginal Thicknesses

Under some clinical conditions, the preparation of crowns of limited marginal thickness is inevitable. In such situations, it is questionable whether the same ideal preparation criteria can be applied equally. Since there are only a small number of studies focusing on the fracture resistance with respect to the marginal thickness, there is a need for a study evaluating whether zirconia crowns of limited marginal thickness are clinically acceptable. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia crowns of limited marginal thickness in the posterior area. Methods: Abutments and CAD/CAM zirconia crowns with a marginal thickness of 1.0 mm were set as the control group, while experimental groups A, B, and C possessed reduced marginal thicknesses of 0.8 mm, 0.6 mm, and 0.4 mm, respectively (n = 10 per group). Resin-based abutment dies and monolithic zirconia crowns were fabricated using the CAD/CAM technique, and a universal testing machine was used to measure the fracture load value. Fractured specimens were examined with a scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc test (p < 0.05). Results: The means and standard deviations of the fracture load values of the control group and the three experimental groups were as follows: control group (1.0 mm): 3090.91 ± 527.77 N; group A (0.8 mm): 2645.39 ± 329.21 N; group B (0.6 mm): 2256.85 ± 454.15 N; group C (0.4 mm): 1957.8 ± 522.14 N. Conclusions: The crowns fabricated with a CAD/CAM zirconia block with limited marginal thicknesses of 0.6 mm and 0.4 mm showed significantly lower fracture resistance values compared to those with the recommended margin thickness of 1.0 mm.

Optical properties of monolithic zirconia crowns: In vitro and In vivo evaluation

Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the monolithic and layered zirconia crowns by their optical property of translucency, using in vitro and in vivo evaluation methods. Material and Methods: One upper incisor and one canine were prepared to receive 6 monolithic Lava Plus HT and 6 layered Lava crowns using the CAD/CAM technology. The translucency in the vitro evaluation, was determined using a digital photoradiometer to measure the light reflected by the crowns in two different conditions, natural and metal plated abutment tooth. A provisional complete prosthesis of an edentulous patient, with the abutment teeth mounted in their anatomical position, was used for the in vivo evaluation. The crowns were randomly placed and evaluated by two independent operators in the oral cavity conditions. Results: In vitro results showed that monolithic crowns were not significantly less translucent than layered ones in both incisor (p=0.098) and canine (p=0.340): contrast ratio 0.978 vs. 0.956 and 0.941 vs. 0.929, respectively (Student -t test; a=0.05). In vivo evaluation results showed that the difference in the luminance was not statistically significant between Lava Plus HT and layered Lava crowns according to Mann Whitney Test, p=0.089 (a=0.01). Conclusions: The difference in translucency between monolithic and layered zirconia crowns was not statistically significant both in vitro and in vivo evaluation. Monolithic zirconia had a good masking ability of the abutment tooth.

Evaluation of Marginal/Internal Fit and Fracture Load of Monolithic Zirconia and Zirconia Lithium Silicate (ZLS) CAD/CAM Crown Systems

Fit accuracy and fracture strength of milled monolithic zirconia (Zi) and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) crowns are important parameters determining the success of these restorations. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the marginal and internal fit of monolithic Zi and ZLS crowns, along with the fracture load, with and without mechanical aging. Thirty-two stone dies acquired from a customized master metal molar die were scanned, and ceramic crowns (16 Zi Ceramill Zolid HT⁺ and 16 ZLS Vita Suprinity) were designed and milled. Absolute marginal discrepancies (AMD), marginal gaps (MG), and internal gaps (IG) of the crowns, in relation to the master metal die, were evaluated using x-ray nanotomography (n = 16). Next, thirty-two metal dies were fabricated based on the master metal die, and crowns (16 Zi; 16 ZLS) cemented and divided into four groups of eight each; eight Zi with mechanical aging (MA), eight Zi without mechanical aging (WMA), eight ZLS (MA), and eight ZLS (WMA). Two groups of crowns (Zi-MA; ZLS-MA) were subjected to 500,000 mechanical cycles (200 ± 50 N, 10 Hz) followed by axial compressive strength testing of all crowns, until failure, and the values were recorded. Independent sample t tests (α = 0.05) revealed no significant differences between Zi and ZLS crowns (p > 0.05); for both internal and marginal gaps, however, there were significant differences in AMD (p < 0.005). Independent samples Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests revealed significant differences between the two materials, Zi and ZLS, regardless of fatigue loading, and for the individual material groups based on aging (α = 0.05). Multiple comparisons using Bonferroni post-hoc analysis showed significant differences between Zi and ZLS material groups, with or without aging. Within the limitations of this study, the ZLS crown fit was found to be on par with Zi, except for the AMD parameter. As regards fracture resistance, both materials survived the normal range of masticatory forces, but the Zi crowns demonstrated greater resistance to fracture. The monolithic Zi and ZLS crowns seem suitable for clinical application, based on the fit and fracture strength values obtained.