In vitro fracture strength of teeth restored with different all-ceramic crown systems

Narong Potiket, Gerard Jules Chiche, Israel M. Finger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

63 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is insufficient knowledge of the strength of all-ceramic crowns bonded to natural teeth to warrant the use of all-ceramic crowns in place of metal-ceramic crowns. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare fracture resistance of crowns made of 3 different types of 2 all-ceramic crown systems - 0.4-mm and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping crowns and zirconia ceramic coping crowns - and metal-ceramic crowns. Forty intact, noncarious human maxillary central incisors were divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group MCC (control), metal-ceramic crown (JRVT High Noble Alloy); Group AC4, crown with 0.4-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); Group AC6, crown with 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); and Group ZC6, crown with 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic coping (Procera AllZirkon). Teeth were prepared for complete-coverage all-ceramic crowns so that a final dimension of 5.5 ± 0.5 mm was achieved incisocervically, mesiodistally, and faciolingually. A 1.0-mm deep shoulder finish line was used with a rounded internal line angle. All restorations were treated with bonding agent (Clearfil SE Bond) and luted with phosphate-monomer-modified adhesive cement (Panavia 21). Fracture strength was tested with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm per minute with an angle of 30 degrees to the long axis of the tooth after restorations were stored in 100% relative humidity of a normal saline solution for 7 days. The mode of fracture was examined visually. Means were calculated and analyzed with 1-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (α=.05). The means of fracture strength were: Group MCC, 405 ± 130 N; Group AC4, 447 ± 123 N; Group AC6, 476 ± 174 N; and Group ZC6, 381 ± 166 N. There was no significant difference between groups (P=.501). The mode of failure for all specimens was fracture of the natural tooth. There was no significant difference in the fracture strength of the teeth restored with all-ceramic crowns with 0.4- and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide copings, 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic copings, and metal ceramic crowns.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)491-495
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume92
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2004

Fingerprint

Tooth Fractures
Ceramics
Crowns
Aluminum Oxide
Metals
Tooth
In Vitro Techniques

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

In vitro fracture strength of teeth restored with different all-ceramic crown systems. / Potiket, Narong; Chiche, Gerard Jules; Finger, Israel M.

In: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, Vol. 92, No. 5, 01.11.2004, p. 491-495.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Potiket, Narong ; Chiche, Gerard Jules ; Finger, Israel M. / In vitro fracture strength of teeth restored with different all-ceramic crown systems. In: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2004 ; Vol. 92, No. 5. pp. 491-495.
@article{711b97f1c519459585548828fe2a2848,
title = "In vitro fracture strength of teeth restored with different all-ceramic crown systems",
abstract = "There is insufficient knowledge of the strength of all-ceramic crowns bonded to natural teeth to warrant the use of all-ceramic crowns in place of metal-ceramic crowns. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare fracture resistance of crowns made of 3 different types of 2 all-ceramic crown systems - 0.4-mm and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping crowns and zirconia ceramic coping crowns - and metal-ceramic crowns. Forty intact, noncarious human maxillary central incisors were divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group MCC (control), metal-ceramic crown (JRVT High Noble Alloy); Group AC4, crown with 0.4-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); Group AC6, crown with 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); and Group ZC6, crown with 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic coping (Procera AllZirkon). Teeth were prepared for complete-coverage all-ceramic crowns so that a final dimension of 5.5 ± 0.5 mm was achieved incisocervically, mesiodistally, and faciolingually. A 1.0-mm deep shoulder finish line was used with a rounded internal line angle. All restorations were treated with bonding agent (Clearfil SE Bond) and luted with phosphate-monomer-modified adhesive cement (Panavia 21). Fracture strength was tested with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm per minute with an angle of 30 degrees to the long axis of the tooth after restorations were stored in 100{\%} relative humidity of a normal saline solution for 7 days. The mode of fracture was examined visually. Means were calculated and analyzed with 1-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (α=.05). The means of fracture strength were: Group MCC, 405 ± 130 N; Group AC4, 447 ± 123 N; Group AC6, 476 ± 174 N; and Group ZC6, 381 ± 166 N. There was no significant difference between groups (P=.501). The mode of failure for all specimens was fracture of the natural tooth. There was no significant difference in the fracture strength of the teeth restored with all-ceramic crowns with 0.4- and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide copings, 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic copings, and metal ceramic crowns.",
author = "Narong Potiket and Chiche, {Gerard Jules} and Finger, {Israel M.}",
year = "2004",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.09.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "92",
pages = "491--495",
journal = "Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry",
issn = "0022-3913",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In vitro fracture strength of teeth restored with different all-ceramic crown systems

AU - Potiket, Narong

AU - Chiche, Gerard Jules

AU - Finger, Israel M.

PY - 2004/11/1

Y1 - 2004/11/1

N2 - There is insufficient knowledge of the strength of all-ceramic crowns bonded to natural teeth to warrant the use of all-ceramic crowns in place of metal-ceramic crowns. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare fracture resistance of crowns made of 3 different types of 2 all-ceramic crown systems - 0.4-mm and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping crowns and zirconia ceramic coping crowns - and metal-ceramic crowns. Forty intact, noncarious human maxillary central incisors were divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group MCC (control), metal-ceramic crown (JRVT High Noble Alloy); Group AC4, crown with 0.4-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); Group AC6, crown with 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); and Group ZC6, crown with 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic coping (Procera AllZirkon). Teeth were prepared for complete-coverage all-ceramic crowns so that a final dimension of 5.5 ± 0.5 mm was achieved incisocervically, mesiodistally, and faciolingually. A 1.0-mm deep shoulder finish line was used with a rounded internal line angle. All restorations were treated with bonding agent (Clearfil SE Bond) and luted with phosphate-monomer-modified adhesive cement (Panavia 21). Fracture strength was tested with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm per minute with an angle of 30 degrees to the long axis of the tooth after restorations were stored in 100% relative humidity of a normal saline solution for 7 days. The mode of fracture was examined visually. Means were calculated and analyzed with 1-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (α=.05). The means of fracture strength were: Group MCC, 405 ± 130 N; Group AC4, 447 ± 123 N; Group AC6, 476 ± 174 N; and Group ZC6, 381 ± 166 N. There was no significant difference between groups (P=.501). The mode of failure for all specimens was fracture of the natural tooth. There was no significant difference in the fracture strength of the teeth restored with all-ceramic crowns with 0.4- and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide copings, 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic copings, and metal ceramic crowns.

AB - There is insufficient knowledge of the strength of all-ceramic crowns bonded to natural teeth to warrant the use of all-ceramic crowns in place of metal-ceramic crowns. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare fracture resistance of crowns made of 3 different types of 2 all-ceramic crown systems - 0.4-mm and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping crowns and zirconia ceramic coping crowns - and metal-ceramic crowns. Forty intact, noncarious human maxillary central incisors were divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group MCC (control), metal-ceramic crown (JRVT High Noble Alloy); Group AC4, crown with 0.4-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); Group AC6, crown with 0.6-mm aluminum oxide coping (Procera AllCeram); and Group ZC6, crown with 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic coping (Procera AllZirkon). Teeth were prepared for complete-coverage all-ceramic crowns so that a final dimension of 5.5 ± 0.5 mm was achieved incisocervically, mesiodistally, and faciolingually. A 1.0-mm deep shoulder finish line was used with a rounded internal line angle. All restorations were treated with bonding agent (Clearfil SE Bond) and luted with phosphate-monomer-modified adhesive cement (Panavia 21). Fracture strength was tested with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm per minute with an angle of 30 degrees to the long axis of the tooth after restorations were stored in 100% relative humidity of a normal saline solution for 7 days. The mode of fracture was examined visually. Means were calculated and analyzed with 1-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (α=.05). The means of fracture strength were: Group MCC, 405 ± 130 N; Group AC4, 447 ± 123 N; Group AC6, 476 ± 174 N; and Group ZC6, 381 ± 166 N. There was no significant difference between groups (P=.501). The mode of failure for all specimens was fracture of the natural tooth. There was no significant difference in the fracture strength of the teeth restored with all-ceramic crowns with 0.4- and 0.6-mm aluminum oxide copings, 0.6-mm zirconia ceramic copings, and metal ceramic crowns.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=7444265287&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=7444265287&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.09.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 15523339

AN - SCOPUS:7444265287

VL - 92

SP - 491

EP - 495

JO - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

JF - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

SN - 0022-3913

IS - 5

ER -