Suppr超能文献

铸造、铣削或激光烧结钴铬合金烤瓷熔附金属冠的断裂强度。

Fracture strength of porcelain fused to metal crowns made of cast, milled or laser-sintered cobalt-chromium.

机构信息

Department of Materials Science and Technology, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.

出版信息

Acta Odontol Scand. 2013 Sep;71(5):1280-9. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2012.757650. Epub 2013 Jan 16.

Abstract

AIMS

The aim was to compare the fracture strength of porcelain fused to metal crowns with copings fabricated in Co-Cr using different manufacturing techniques (casting, milling and laser-sintering) with crowns manufactured in a high-gold alloy.

METHODS

A total of 50 identical crowns were fabricated and sub-divided into five groups; cast Co-Cr, milled Co-Cr, two groups of laser-sintered Co-Cr and a control group cast in a high-gold alloy. After thermocycling (5000 cycles, 5-55°C) and pre-load (30-300 N, 10,000 cycles) the crowns were loaded until fracture. Load (N) and fracture mode were recorded.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in fracture strength between the control group and one of the laser-sintered groups. The mean values (N) for the groups were as follows: cast Co-Cr, 1560 ± 274; milled Co-Cr, 1643 ± 153; laser-sintered Co-Cr 1, 1448 ± 168; laser-sintered Co-Cr 2, 1562 ± 72; control group, 1725 ± 220.

CONCLUSION

There is no difference in strength between Co-Cr crowns produced using the different production technologies: casting, milling or laser-sintering. Metal ceramic crowns made with copings fabricated in a high-gold alloy present numerically higher fracture strength than crowns made with copings fabricated in Co-Cr alloys. The difference is confirmed when analyzing the fracture surfaces, but the difference in fracture strength value is limited and is only significant with regard to one of the two laser-sintered groups.

摘要

目的

比较使用不同制造技术(铸造、铣削和激光烧结)制造的 Co-Cr 烤瓷熔附金属冠与使用高金合金制造的冠的抗压强度。

方法

共制作 50 个相同的牙冠,并将其分为五组:铸造 Co-Cr、铣削 Co-Cr、两组激光烧结 Co-Cr 和一组高金合金铸造的对照组。经过热循环(5000 次,5-55°C)和预载(30-300 N,10000 次)后,牙冠被加载至断裂。记录负载(N)和断裂模式。

结果

对照组和其中一组激光烧结组的抗压强度有显著差异(p<0.05)。各组的平均值(N)如下:铸造 Co-Cr,1560±274;铣削 Co-Cr,1643±153;激光烧结 Co-Cr1,1448±168;激光烧结 Co-Cr2,1562±72;对照组,1725±220。

结论

使用不同生产技术(铸造、铣削或激光烧结)生产的 Co-Cr 牙冠的强度没有差异。使用高金合金制造的带牙冠的金属陶瓷冠的抗压强度数值高于使用 Co-Cr 合金制造的牙冠。当分析断裂表面时可以确认这种差异,但断裂强度值的差异有限,并且仅在两组激光烧结中的一组中具有显著意义。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验