Department of Restorative Dentistry, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil.
Oper Dent. 2012 Mar-Apr;37(2):130-6. doi: 10.2341/11-105-L. Epub 2011 Sep 26.
The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of full ceramic crowns using two techniques-indirect conventional crowns retained by glass fiber posts, and endocrowns with an "anchorage" in the pulp chamber-and analyze the failure mode. For this purpose, 20 healthy mandibular molars were divided into two groups (n=10): GroupGC contained teeth with indirect conventional crowns, filling cores, and glass fiber posts; Group GE contained teeth with restorations of the endocrown type. Teeth were endodontically treated and prepared for ceramic restorations fabricated by the injection technique(IPS e.max Press, Ivoclar-Vivadent), forming the GC and GE groups. Specimens were mount-ed in a universal test machine (EMIC) and were submitted to an oblique compression load, at an angle of 135 degrees to the long axis of the tooth, until failure. Statistical evaluation performed by the Mann-Whitney nonparametric test showed significant differences between the two groups (p=0.002), with Group GE shown to be more resistant to compressive forces than Group GC. The pre-dominant failure pattern in both groups was fracture of the tooth on the side of force application and/or consequent displacement of the restoration on the opposite side.
本体外研究旨在比较两种技术(间接常规冠通过玻璃纤维桩固位,以及牙髓室内“固位体”的嵌体冠)的全瓷冠的断裂强度,并分析其失效模式。为此,将 20 颗健康的下颌磨牙分为两组(n=10):GC 组包含间接常规冠、填充核和玻璃纤维桩的牙齿;GE 组包含嵌体冠类型修复的牙齿。牙齿经根管治疗并制备陶瓷修复体(IPS e.max Press,Ivoclar-Vivadent),形成 GC 和 GE 组。将标本安装在万能试验机(EMIC)上,以 135 度的角度向牙齿的长轴施加斜向压缩载荷,直至破坏。Mann-Whitney 非参数检验的统计评估显示两组之间存在显著差异(p=0.002),GE 组比 GC 组更能抵抗压缩力。两组的主要失效模式均为受力侧牙齿断裂和/或对侧修复体移位。