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 Resistance and Failure Mode of Monolithic Zirconia, Veneered Zirconia, and Metal-Ceramic Full-Coverage Restorations: A Comparative In Vitro Study.
    Author: Almohammed SN, Dourado AM, Al Quran FA.
    Journal: Int J Prosthodont; 2024 Feb 21; 37(1):80-91. PubMed ID: 38381987.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the fracture mode and strength of monolithic zirconia to veneered zirconia and metal-ceramic full-coverage restorations following artificial aging and to test the performance of translucent zirconia in terms of load-bearing capacity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two mandibular first molars were prepared and scanned for their respective groups of full-coverage restorations. A total of 75 full-coverage restorations were fabricated and divided into five groups: two groups for monolithic zirconia, two groups for veneered zirconia, and one group for metal-ceramic. Then, 75 light-cured hybrid composite resin dies were fabricated to serve as abutments. Before cementation, all full-coverage restorations were subjected to accelerated aging. After cementation, all full-coverage restorations were subjected to compressive loading until fracture in an electromechanical universal testing machine. A two-way nested ANOVA and Tukey test were used to analyze the results with 95% confidence levels. RESULTS: Monolithic zirconia full-coverage restorations showed the highest mean fracture resistance of 4,201.0 N, followed by metalceramic full-coverage restorations of 3,609.3 N, and veneered zirconia full-coverage restorations showed the lowest mean fracture resistance of 2,524.6 N. The main mode of failure was cohesive bulk fracture for the monolithic zirconia group, cohesive/adhesive failure with infrastructure damage for the veneered zirconia group, and cohesive/adhesive failure without infrastructure damage for the metal-ceramic group. CONCLUSIONS: Monolithic zirconia full-coverage restorations showed superior resistance to fracture compared to metal-ceramic full-coverage restorations and are highly reliable in terms of load-bearing capacity within the posterior regions of the mouth.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]