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: Bicuspid Axial Wall Height Effect on CAD/CAM Crown Fracture Mode on Preparations Containing Advanced Total Occlusal Convergence.
    Author: Miller M, DuVall N, Brewster J, Wajdowicz MN, Harris A, Roberts HW.
    Journal: J Prosthodont; 2018 Oct; 27(8):737-740. PubMed ID: 29457311.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate bicuspid axial wall height effect on the fracture mode of adhesively luted, all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns with a 20° total occlusal convergence (TOC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Recently extracted premolars were randomly divided into 4 groups (n = 12) with all-ceramic crown preparations accomplished using a high-speed handpiece inserted into a milling device. Specimens were prepared containing occlusogingival axial wall heights of 3, 2, and 1 mm as well as a group containing a flat preparation surface with no axial wall height. All preparations contained a 20° TOC. Completed preparation surface area was determined, and preparation features confirmed using a digital measuring microscope. Scanned preparations (CEREC) were fitted with milled and crystallized lithium disilicate full coverage restorations and luted with a self-etching adhesive resin cement after hydrofluoric acid etching and silanation. All manufacturer recommendations were followed. Specimens were stored at 37°C/98% humidity for 24 hours. Specimens were tested to failure at a 45° angle to the long axis of the tooth root on a universal testing machine. Failure load was converted to MPa using the available bonding surface area with mean data analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn's (p = 0.05) RESULTS: The 3 mm preparation height specimens were similar to the 2 mm specimens, and both demonstrated significantly stronger failure load than the 1 mm axial wall height and flat preparation specimens. The flat preparation and 1 mm axial wall height specimens all failed adhesively, while the 2 mm and 3 mm specimens failed largely due to tooth fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Further evidence is provided that CAD/CAM adhesive techniques may compensate for less than ideal preparation features. Under the conditions of this study, bicuspid preparations with a 20° TOC restored with adhesively luted, CAD/CAM e.max CAD crowns require at least 2 mm of axial wall height, but further planned fatigue studies are necessary before definitive recommendations can be made.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]