Renos Argyrou1, Geoffrey A Thompson2, Seok-Hwan Cho3, David W Berzins4. 1. Resident, Graduate Prosthodontics, Marquette University School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, Wis. 2. Associate Professor and Director, Graduate Prosthodontics, Department of General Dental Sciences, Marquette University School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, Wis. 3. Assistant Professor and Director, Predoctoral Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, Department of General Dental Sciences, Marquette University School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, Wis. 4. Professor and Director, Graduate Dental Biomaterials, Department of General Dental Sciences, Marquette University School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, Wis. Electronic address: david.berzins@marquette.edu.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Two novel restorative materials, a polymer infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) and a resin nanoceramic (RNC), for computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD-CAM) applications have recently become commercially available. Little independent evidence regarding their mechanical properties exists to facilitate material selection. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the edge chipping resistance and flexural strength of the PICN and RNC materials and compare them with 2 commonly used feldspathic ceramic (FC) and leucite reinforced glass-ceramic (LRGC) CAD-CAM materials that share the same clinical indications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PICN, RNC, FC, and LRGC material specimens were obtained by sectioning commercially available CAD-CAM blocks. Edge chipping test specimens (n=20/material) were adhesively attached to a resin substrate before testing. Edge chips were produced using a 120-degree, sharp, conical diamond indenter mounted on a universal testing machine and positioned 0.1 to 0.7 mm horizontally from the specimen's edge. The chipping force was plotted against distance to the edge, and the data were fitted to linear and quadratic equations. One-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05) in edge chipping toughness. Beam specimens (n=22/material) were tested for determining flexural strength using a 3-point bend test. Weibull statistics determined intergroup differences (α=.05). Flexural modulus and work of fracture were also calculated, and 1-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05) RESULTS: Significant (P<.05) differences were found among the 4 CAD-CAM materials for the 4 mechanical properties. Specifically, the material rankings were edge chipping toughness: RNC>LRGC=FC>PICN; flexural strength: RNC=LRGC>PICN>FC; flexural modulus: RNC<PICN<LRGC<FC; and work of fracture: RNC>LRGC=PICN>FC. CONCLUSIONS: The RNC material demonstrated superior performance for the mechanical properties tested compared with the other 3 materials.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Two novel restorative materials, a polymer infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) and a resin nanoceramic (RNC), for computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD-CAM) applications have recently become commercially available. Little independent evidence regarding their mechanical properties exists to facilitate material selection. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the edge chipping resistance and flexural strength of the PICN and RNC materials and compare them with 2 commonly used feldspathic ceramic (FC) and leucite reinforced glass-ceramic (LRGC) CAD-CAM materials that share the same clinical indications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PICN, RNC, FC, and LRGC material specimens were obtained by sectioning commercially available CAD-CAM blocks. Edge chipping test specimens (n=20/material) were adhesively attached to a resin substrate before testing. Edge chips were produced using a 120-degree, sharp, conical diamond indenter mounted on a universal testing machine and positioned 0.1 to 0.7 mm horizontally from the specimen's edge. The chipping force was plotted against distance to the edge, and the data were fitted to linear and quadratic equations. One-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05) in edge chipping toughness. Beam specimens (n=22/material) were tested for determining flexural strength using a 3-point bend test. Weibull statistics determined intergroup differences (α=.05). Flexural modulus and work of fracture were also calculated, and 1-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05) RESULTS: Significant (P<.05) differences were found among the 4 CAD-CAM materials for the 4 mechanical properties. Specifically, the material rankings were edge chipping toughness: RNC>LRGC=FC>PICN; flexural strength: RNC=LRGC>PICN>FC; flexural modulus: RNC<PICN<LRGC<FC; and work of fracture: RNC>LRGC=PICN>FC. CONCLUSIONS: The RNC material demonstrated superior performance for the mechanical properties tested compared with the other 3 materials.