Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Faculty of Dentistry, Department Head of Restorative Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Bağdat Caddesi No: 238, 34728 Göztepe, Istanbul, Turkey.
Odontology. 2024 Jul;112(3):884-894. doi: 10.1007/s10266-023-00884-z. Epub 2024 Jan 30.
This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the fracture strength (FS; N) of composite, feldspathic, and glass-ceramic computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) endocrowns after thermomechanical aging. Seventy non-carious human molars were randomly divided into seven groups, according to the CAD/CAM material used for endocrown fabrication. Intact molars without cavity preparations were used as control (n = 10). Following endodontic treatment, standardized endocrown cavities were prepared and endocrowns were fabricated using composite (Cerasmart270, CS and Grandio Blocs, GB), fired and milled zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Celtra Duo, CD), leucite-reinforced feldspar ceramic (LRF Initial, LRF), and feldspathic (Cerec Blocks, CE) materials which were luted with universal adhesive (Futurabond U; Voco) and dual-cure resin cement (Bifix QM). Following thermocycling for 20,000 cycles and 480,000 load cycles in a chewing simulator (CS-4.2, SD Mechatronik), FS was evaluated (Instron). Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's tests (p < 0.05). FS was significantly influenced by the tested material (p = 0.00). CS had the highest FS, which was not significantly different from intact molars and fired CD (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences in FS between LRF, GB, and CD, which were significantly higher than CE. Most of the failure modes of CS, CD, and GB were repairable, whereas those of CE were irreparable. All the tested materials withstood clinically relevant axial forces. Composite endocrowns exhibited more favorable fracture pattern, whereas feldspathic and leucite-reinforced feldspar ceramic endocrowns exhibited mostly irreparable fractures.
本体外研究旨在评估经热机械老化后复合、长石质和玻璃陶瓷计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制造 (CAD/CAM) 嵌体的断裂强度 (FS; N)。70 颗无龋人磨牙根据用于嵌体制作的 CAD/CAM 材料随机分为七组。完整的无龋磨牙未经腔制备用作对照 (n=10)。在根管治疗后,制备标准化的嵌体腔,并使用复合 (Cerasmart270、CS 和 Grandio Blocs、GB)、烧制和铣削氧化锆增强硅酸锂 (Celtra Duo、CD)、锂辉石增强长石陶瓷 (LRF Initial、LRF) 和长石 (Cerec Blocks、CE) 材料制作嵌体,并用通用粘结剂 (Futurabond U; Voco) 和双固化树脂水泥 (Bifix QM) 粘结。在咀嚼模拟器 (CS-4.2、SD Mechatronik) 中进行 20,000 次热循环和 480,000 次负载循环后,评估 FS (Instron)。使用单向方差分析和事后 Tukey 检验 (p<0.05) 分析数据。测试材料显著影响 FS (p=0.00)。CS 的 FS 最高,与完整磨牙和烧制 CD 无显著差异 (p>0.05)。LRF、GB 和 CD 的 FS 无显著差异,且显著高于 CE。CS、CD 和 GB 的大多数失效模式可修复,而 CE 的则不可修复。所有测试材料均能承受临床相关的轴向力。复合嵌体表现出更有利的断裂模式,而长石质和锂辉石增强长石陶瓷嵌体则表现出大多数不可修复的断裂。