These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Fracture load of monolithic CAD/CAM lithium disilicate ceramic crowns and veneered zirconia crowns as a posterior implant restoration.
    Author: Kim JH, Lee SJ, Park JS, Ryu JJ.
    Journal: Implant Dent; 2013 Feb; 22(1):66-70. PubMed ID: 23296031.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the fracture load and failure mode of the monolithic lithium disilicate crown (e.max group) and 2 types of veneered zirconia crowns, hand layer (ZV group) and heat pressed (ZP group), as a posterior implant-supported restoration. METHODS: A total of 24 all-ceramic crowns for molar tooth were fabricated using the computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) system. The e.max group crowns and zirconia copings for ZV and ZP groups were fabricated using a Cerec milling unit. The ZV group was fabricated using a hand-layer veneering method, and the ZP group using a heat-pressing method. All crowns were luted to the abutments, which were connected to implant fixtures, using resin cement. Fracture load was measured using the universal testing machine, and the fracture surface was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The ZP group showed significantly higher fracture load (5229.3 N) compared with the e.max group (3852.1 N) and ZV group (3100.3 N). All fractures in the ZV group occurred in the veneered layer. CONCLUSION: Monolithic CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns are applicable to posterior implant-supported restorations because the fracture load was higher than the average occlusal force.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]