Jens Fischer1, Bogna Stawarczyk. 1. Department of Dental Materials Science, Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland. jens.fischer@zzmk.unizh.ch
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Due to its high fracture toughness ceria-stabilized ZrO(2)/Al(2)O(3) nanocomposite (Ce-TZP/A) could be superior to Y-TZP in clinical use. However, the compatibility to veneering ceramics is not yet investigated and therefore subject of this study. METHODS: Fracture strength and crazing resistance of veneered Ce-TZP/A frameworks (Nanozir, Matsushita Electric Works) were investigated in comparison to sintered and hipped Y-TZP (Hint-ELs). Frameworks were machined (HiCut, Hint-ELs), sintered where applicable (hiTherm, Hint-ELs), and veneered in a standardized procedure (Cerabien ZR, Noritake). Fracture strength of the crowns was assessed in a shear test (n=10). Biaxial flexural strength of the core materials was measured according to ISO 6872 (n=10). To assess the thermal compatibility between framework and veneer the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) of all materials was determined (n=3) and a crazing test carried out (n=12). RESULTS: Fracture strength was equal for crowns with Ce-TZP/A (866.6+/-132.1N) and sintered Y-TZP (904.5+/-168.2N), while crowns with hipped Y-TZP were significantly stronger (1380.6+/-253.2N) (Student's t-test, p<0.05). These values correlated with the biaxial flexural strength of the three core materials (Ce-TZP/A: 1238.0+/-200.0MPa, sintered Y-TZP: 1181.8+/-232.5MPa and hipped Y-TZP: 1521.8+/-163.8MPa). Failure of both hipped and sintered Y-TZP crowns occurred by chipping of the veneer or total fracture, while the Ce-TZP/A crowns predominantly failed by chipping of the veneer. In the crazing test both sintered and hipped Y-TZP performed slightly better than Ce-TZP/A. CTE's were as follows: Ce-TZP/A: 10.3microm/mK, sintered Y-TZP: 10.7microm/mK, hipped Y-TZP: 10.9microm/mK, and Cerabien ZR: 9.9microm/mK. SIGNIFICANCE: The CTE of the veneering ceramic has to be adjusted to Ce-TZP/A frameworks.
OBJECTIVES: Due to its high fracture toughness ceria-stabilized ZrO(2)/Al(2)O(3) nanocomposite (Ce-TZP/A) could be superior to Y-TZP in clinical use. However, the compatibility to veneering ceramics is not yet investigated and therefore subject of this study. METHODS:Fracture strength and crazing resistance of veneered Ce-TZP/A frameworks (Nanozir, Matsushita Electric Works) were investigated in comparison to sintered and hipped Y-TZP (Hint-ELs). Frameworks were machined (HiCut, Hint-ELs), sintered where applicable (hiTherm, Hint-ELs), and veneered in a standardized procedure (Cerabien ZR, Noritake). Fracture strength of the crowns was assessed in a shear test (n=10). Biaxial flexural strength of the core materials was measured according to ISO 6872 (n=10). To assess the thermal compatibility between framework and veneer the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) of all materials was determined (n=3) and a crazing test carried out (n=12). RESULTS:Fracture strength was equal for crowns with Ce-TZP/A (866.6+/-132.1N) and sintered Y-TZP (904.5+/-168.2N), while crowns with hipped Y-TZP were significantly stronger (1380.6+/-253.2N) (Student's t-test, p<0.05). These values correlated with the biaxial flexural strength of the three core materials (Ce-TZP/A: 1238.0+/-200.0MPa, sintered Y-TZP: 1181.8+/-232.5MPa and hipped Y-TZP: 1521.8+/-163.8MPa). Failure of both hipped and sintered Y-TZP crowns occurred by chipping of the veneer or total fracture, while the Ce-TZP/A crowns predominantly failed by chipping of the veneer. In the crazing test both sintered and hipped Y-TZP performed slightly better than Ce-TZP/A. CTE's were as follows: Ce-TZP/A: 10.3microm/mK, sintered Y-TZP: 10.7microm/mK, hipped Y-TZP: 10.9microm/mK, and Cerabien ZR: 9.9microm/mK. SIGNIFICANCE: The CTE of the veneering ceramic has to be adjusted to Ce-TZP/A frameworks.
Authors: Bogna Stawarczyk; Mutlu Ozcan; Lubica Hallmann; Andreas Ender; Albert Mehl; Christoph H F Hämmerlet Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 3.573