Martin Rosentritt1, Stefanie Krifka2, Thomas Strasser2, Verena Preis2. 1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, UKR University Hospital Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Germany. martin.rosentritt@ukr.de. 2. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, UKR University Hospital Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of material, preparation, and pre-treatment on the aging and fracture force of CAD/CAM resin composite molar crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CAD/CAM molar crowns (n = 80) were milled from four resin composites (Block HC, Shofu; Lava Ultimate, 3 M; Grandio Blocs, Voco; and Tetric CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, with/without sandblasting). Extracted human teeth were prepared with optimal preparation (height 6-8 mm, angle 6-8°) or worst-case preparation (height 3.5-4 mm, angle 10-15°). Both groups were prepared with a 1-mm deep cervical circular shoulder. Crowns were adhesively bonded after corresponding tooth treatment required for the individual adhesive systems (Table 1). Specimens were aged for 90 days in water storage (37 °C) and subsequently subjected to thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML 3000 × 5 °C/3000 × 55 °C, 2 min each cycle, H20 distilled; 1.2 × 106 cycles à 50 N, 1.6 Hz). De-bonding and fracture force was determined. STATISTICS: one-way-ANOVA; post hoc Bonferroni, α = 0.05. RESULTS: Four crowns of Lava Ultimate with worst-case preparation de-bonded during TCML. Individual crowns without sandblasting treatment (3x Tetric CAD with optimal preparation; 1x Tetric CAD with worst-case preparation) de-bonded during water storage. One crown of Grandio Blocs with optimal preparation showed a small chipping during TCML. All other crowns survived TCML and water storage without failure. Fracture forces differed between 1272 ± 211 N (Lava Ultimate) and 3061 ± 521 N (Tetric CAD). All Grandio Blocs and Tetric CAD crowns revealed significantly (p ≤ 0.023) higher fracture forces than Block HC or Lava Ultimate crowns. No significantly different (p > 0.05) fracture forces were found between optimal or worst-case preparation/fit groups. CONCLUSIONS: De-bonding during water storage and TCML was dependent on material and crown pre-treatment. Therefore, surface roughening seems strongly required. Fracture forces were not influenced by preparation but by the type of material. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinical success and de-bonding of CAD/CAM resin composite crowns is strongly influenced by the type of material and its pre-treatment.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of material, preparation, and pre-treatment on the aging and fracture force of CAD/CAM resin composite molar crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CAD/CAM molar crowns (n = 80) were milled from four resin composites (Block HC, Shofu; Lava Ultimate, 3 M; Grandio Blocs, Voco; and Tetric CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, with/without sandblasting). Extracted human teeth were prepared with optimal preparation (height 6-8 mm, angle 6-8°) or worst-case preparation (height 3.5-4 mm, angle 10-15°). Both groups were prepared with a 1-mm deep cervical circular shoulder. Crowns were adhesively bonded after corresponding tooth treatment required for the individual adhesive systems (Table 1). Specimens were aged for 90 days in water storage (37 °C) and subsequently subjected to thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML 3000 × 5 °C/3000 × 55 °C, 2 min each cycle, H20 distilled; 1.2 × 106 cycles à 50 N, 1.6 Hz). De-bonding and fracture force was determined. STATISTICS: one-way-ANOVA; post hoc Bonferroni, α = 0.05. RESULTS: Four crowns of Lava Ultimate with worst-case preparation de-bonded during TCML. Individual crowns without sandblasting treatment (3x Tetric CAD with optimal preparation; 1x Tetric CAD with worst-case preparation) de-bonded during water storage. One crown of Grandio Blocs with optimal preparation showed a small chipping during TCML. All other crowns survived TCML and water storage without failure. Fracture forces differed between 1272 ± 211 N (Lava Ultimate) and 3061 ± 521 N (Tetric CAD). All Grandio Blocs and Tetric CAD crowns revealed significantly (p ≤ 0.023) higher fracture forces than Block HC or Lava Ultimate crowns. No significantly different (p > 0.05) fracture forces were found between optimal or worst-case preparation/fit groups. CONCLUSIONS: De-bonding during water storage and TCML was dependent on material and crown pre-treatment. Therefore, surface roughening seems strongly required. Fracture forces were not influenced by preparation but by the type of material. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinical success and de-bonding of CAD/CAM resin composite crowns is strongly influenced by the type of material and its pre-treatment.
Authors: Sebastian Hinz; Tobias Bensel; Wolfgang Bömicke; Anders Henningsen; Judith Rudolph; Arne F Boeckler Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 3.623