Bajunaid Salwa Omar, Alshiddi Ibraheem, Alhomaidhi Lamya, Almutairi Rania, Alolayan Shoq, Habib Syed Rashid
Department of Prosthetic Dental Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia.
King Abdulaziz Medical City-National Guard, Riyadh 14611, Saudi Arabia.
Materials (Basel). 2021 Aug 26;14(17):4838. doi: 10.3390/ma14174838.
The purpose was to compare the fracture resistance and the mode of failure of different contemporary restorative materials to restore implant supported, cement-retained mandibular molars.
Two 5 × 10 mm titanium dental implants were mounted in resin blocks and prefabricated titanium and zirconia abutments were connected to each implant. Each implant received forty crowns resembling mandibular first molars. The specimens were divided into four groups (n = 10/group) for each abutment according to the type of material; Group A: porcelain fused to metal crowns; Group B: monolithic zirconia crowns; Group C: zirconia coping with ceramic veneer; Group D: all ceramic lithium disilicate crowns. Specimens were cemented to the abutments, mounted into a universal testing machine, and vertical static load was applied at a speed of 1 mm/min. The test stopped at signs of visual/audible fracture/chipping. Fracture resistance values were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's tests (α ≤ 0.05). The modes of failure were visually observed.
A statistically significant difference ( < 0.001) of the fracture resistance values among tested groups was found. The group that showed the highest fracture resistance was Group A for both the titanium and the zirconia abutments (3.029 + 0.248 and 2.59 ± 0.39, respectively) while Group D for both abutments (1.134 + 0.289 and 1.68 ± 0.13) exhibited the least resistance.
Fracture resistance and fracture mode varied depending on type of restorative material. For both titanium and zirconia abutments, porcelain fused to metal showed the highest fracture resistance values followed by monolithic zirconia.
本研究旨在比较不同当代修复材料用于修复种植体支持的、粘结固位的下颌磨牙时的抗折性及失效模式。
将两颗5×10毫米的牙科钛种植体植入树脂块中，并将预制的钛基台和氧化锆基台分别连接到每个种植体上。每个种植体上安装40个类似下颌第一磨牙的牙冠。根据材料类型，将每个基台的标本分为四组（每组n = 10）；A组：金属烤瓷冠；B组：全瓷氧化锆冠；C组：氧化锆基底加陶瓷贴面；D组：全瓷二硅酸锂冠。将标本粘结到基台上，安装到万能试验机中，以1毫米/分钟的速度施加垂直静载。当出现肉眼可见/可听到的断裂/崩瓷迹象时测试停止。使用方差分析和Tukey检验（α≤0.05）分析抗折性值。通过肉眼观察失效模式。
发现测试组之间的抗折性值存在统计学显著差异（<0.001）。对于钛基台和氧化锆基台，抗折性最高的组均为A组（分别为3.029 + 0.248和2.59±0.39），而两个基台的D组（1.134 + 0.289和1.68±0.13）抗折性最低。
抗折性和断裂模式因修复材料类型而异。对于钛基台和氧化锆基台，金属烤瓷冠的抗折性值最高，其次是全瓷氧化锆冠。
