PURPOSE: Metal-ceramic inlay designs were developed to determine if the esthetic qualities of all-ceramic inlays could be duplicated and at the same time improve their strength and stability. The objectives of this study were to: (1) compare the fracture resistance of metal-ceramic inlays with that of all-ceramic inlays; (2) determine the correlation between the degree of preparation taper and fracture resistance; and (3) determine the correlation between marginal gap width and fracture resistance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Inlay preparations were made on 60 Dentoform teeth, with 30 teeth allocated for metal-ceramic inlays and 30 teeth for all-ceramic inlays. Each group was further subdivided into 5-, 10-, and 20-degree taper preparations. Metal-ceramic inlays were fabricated using Goldtech Bio 2000 metal and Ceramco porcelain extending to the margin, while all-ceramic inlays were made from Empress II ceramic. Marginal gap widths were measured at six critical areas after fabrication. The load at failure was measured using an Instron Universal Testing Machine. RESULTS: The mean fracture load for all-ceramic inlays and metal-ceramic inlays at 5, 10, and 20 degrees was 70+/-40 N, 48+/-37 N, 33+/-7 N, and 40+/-23 N, 29+/-22 N, and 14+/-4 N, respectively. The mean gap width was 105 microm and 126 microm for all-ceramic and metal-ceramic inlays, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean fracture load for Empress inlays was significantly higher than that for metal-ceramic inlays. Inlays with a 5-degree taper were significantly more fracture resistant than those with a 20-degree taper. There was no relation between marginal gap width and fracture resistance.
PURPOSE:Metal-ceramic inlay designs were developed to determine if the esthetic qualities of all-ceramic inlays could be duplicated and at the same time improve their strength and stability. The objectives of this study were to: (1) compare the fracture resistance of metal-ceramic inlays with that of all-ceramic inlays; (2) determine the correlation between the degree of preparation taper and fracture resistance; and (3) determine the correlation between marginal gap width and fracture resistance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Inlay preparations were made on 60 Dentoform teeth, with 30 teeth allocated for metal-ceramic inlays and 30 teeth for all-ceramic inlays. Each group was further subdivided into 5-, 10-, and 20-degree taper preparations. Metal-ceramic inlays were fabricated using Goldtech Bio 2000 metal and Ceramco porcelain extending to the margin, while all-ceramic inlays were made from Empress II ceramic. Marginal gap widths were measured at six critical areas after fabrication. The load at failure was measured using an Instron Universal Testing Machine. RESULTS: The mean fracture load for all-ceramic inlays and metal-ceramic inlays at 5, 10, and 20 degrees was 70+/-40 N, 48+/-37 N, 33+/-7 N, and 40+/-23 N, 29+/-22 N, and 14+/-4 N, respectively. The mean gap width was 105 microm and 126 microm for all-ceramic and metal-ceramic inlays, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean fracture load for Empress inlays was significantly higher than that for metal-ceramic inlays. Inlays with a 5-degree taper were significantly more fracture resistant than those with a 20-degree taper. There was no relation between marginal gap width and fracture resistance.