Biaxial flexural strength of bilayered zirconia using various veneering ceramics

Fracture strength of porcelain veneer on surface-treated zirconia

In this study, we investigated the effects of surface treatment on the fracture strength of porcelain-veneered zirconia. Highly translucent 4 mol% yttria-stabilized zirconia disks (KATANA HT, Kuraray Noritake Dental) were divided into three surface-treatment groups: 1)as-sintered, 2) alumina sandblasted, and 3) ground. Crystallographic and surface-roughness analyses were conducted for each group. Veneering ceramics (Cerabien ZR, Kuraray Noritake Dental) were applied to the zirconia surfaces. The fracture strengths of the porcelain-veneered zirconia disks were measured using biaxial flexural-strength tests. Crystallographic analysis revealed that grinding and sandblasting increased the fractions of the monoclinic and rhombohedral zirconia phases. The ground specimens had a higher surface roughness than the sandblasted specimens. Weibull analysis showed no significant differences in biaxial flexural strength among the three groups. The results suggest that these surface treatments do not affect the fracture strength of porcelain-veneered zirconia.

Effect of veneering material type and thickness ratio on flexural strength of bi-layered PEEK restorations before and after thermal cycling

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was evaluating the biaxial strength of bi-layered PEEK restorations before and after aging using different veneering materials in different thickness ratios.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ninety specimens of thickness 1.5 mm were divided into three groups according to their veneering material. Group (CAD LD): BioHPP discs veneered with CAD milled lithium disilicate (n=30), group (CAD C): BioHPP discs veneered with CAD milled composite (n=30), and group (LC): BioHPP discs veneered with conventionally layered composite (n=30). Each group was subdivided into 3 subgroups (n=10) according to the different thickness ratios between the core and the veneering material (TC:TV). Subgroup 1: TC:TV=1:0.5, subgroup 2: TC:TV=0.7:0.8, and subgroup 3: TC:TV=0.5:1. Half of the specimens of each subgroup were subjected to thermocycling, and the bi-axial flexural strength of all specimens was tested before and after aging. Three-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni's post hoc test were used for data analysis. The significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Material, thickness ratio, and aging all had a significant effect on biaxial flexural strength. (LC) group had the highest biaxial flexural strength. TC:TV=0.5:1 showed the lowest biaxial flexural strength. All groups showed significant decrease in biaxial flexural strength after aging.

CONCLUSIONS

Veneering material for PEEK together with the thickness ratio between the core and veneering material greatly affect the flexural strength of bi-layered restorations. Thermocycling negatively impacts the flexural strength of PEEK bi-layered restorations.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

According to the results of that study, PEEK cores are best veneered with conventionally layered composite with core to veneering thickness ratio being 1:0.5.

Effect of Cosmetic Ceramics on Fracture Toughness of All-Ceramic Restorations

OBJECTIVES

The use of zirconia as a framework for prosthetic restorations is increasing due to its favorable mechanical properties. Zirconia also has remarkable aesthetic properties when used as a framework and covered with a layer of cosmetic ceramic. The aim of this study was to compare the fracture toughness of three types of aesthetic ceramics, namely VITA VM®9, ceraMotion® Zr, and IPS e.max® Ceram.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three groups of aesthetic ceramics (n=10) were subjected to three-point bending tests. The force leading to fracture was recorded for each sample to measure the impact of the ceramic type on the solidity of the framework. The type of fracture has not been studied in this work. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to statistically analyze the results.

RESULTS

The statistical analysis showed significantly different fracture toughness values among the three groups. IPS e.max® showed the lowest fracture toughness (25.42 MPa) compared to VITA VM®9 and ceraMotion® Zr (respectively 40.39 MPa; P<0.001, and 48.78 MPa; P<0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that aesthetic ceramics play an important role in the fracture toughness of all-ceramic restorations.