Mechanical Resistance of Different Dental Ceramics and Composite, Milled, or Printed Materials: A Laboratory Study
Open Access
- 29 November 2024
- journal article
- research article
- Published by MDPI AG in Applied Sciences
- Vol. 14 (23) , 11129
Abstract
Contemporary indirect restorative materials vary in their physical and mechanical properties, necessitating additional research. This investigation aims to compare the mechanical properties (such as fatigue and compressive strength) of indirect dental restorative materials. In an in vitro study, the mechanical behaviour of monolithic onlay restorations made from a lithium disilicate glass–ceramic (Group A), a ceramic-infiltrated composite (Group B), a polymer-based composite resin (Group C), and zirconia (Group D), bonded to a prepared tooth model, was evaluated after ageing and mechanical cycling. The average value of compressive strength (stage of cracking) in each group was as follows: Group A, 871 N; Group B, 728 N; Group C, 2655 N; and Group D, 2005 N. Moreover, the results of the compressive strength test (stage of destruction) in each group were as follows: Group A, 2516.5 N; Group B, 2266 N; Group C, 5670 N; and Group D, 3543 N. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s (HSD) post hoc test was conducted to assess pairwise comparisons among group means. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Groups C and D and the others, highlighting the potential of these materials in clinical applications. Based on the average values, it can be concluded that the 3D-printed ceramic-infiltrated composite onlays exhibited the highest compressive resistance values among the materials evaluated. The lithium disilicate glass–ceramic and the ceramic-infiltrated composite are brittle materials, which should be considered when covering teeth with high occlusal stress.Keywords
Funding Information
- Medical University Sofia (no. D-94/04.06.2021)
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Zirconia restoration types, properties, tooth preparation design, and bonding. A narrative reviewJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, 2023
- Clinical performance comparison between lithium disilicate and hybrid resin nano-ceramic CAD/CAM onlay restorations: a two-year randomized clinical split-mouth studyOdontology, 2023
- Survey of the mechanical and physical behaviors of yttria-stabilized zirconia from multiple dental laboratoriesJADA Foundational Science, 2023
- Resin-Based Composites for Direct and Indirect RestorationsDental Clinics of North America, 2022
- Comparison of mechanical properties of different reinforced glass-ceramicsThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2022
- Physical and surface properties of a 3D-printed composite resin for a digital workflowThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2020
- Load bearing capacity and Weibull characteristics of inlay-retained resin-bonded fixed dental prosthesis made of all-ceramic, fiber-reinforced composite and metal-ceramic after cyclic loadingJournal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 2020
- Translucent zirconia in the ceramic scenario for monolithic restorations: A flexural strength and translucency comparison testJournal of Dentistry, 2017
- Ten-year survival and complication rates of lithium-disilicate (Empress 2) tooth-supported crowns, implant-supported crowns, and fixed dental prosthesesJournal of Dentistry, 2017
- Two-body wear rate of CAD/CAM resin blocks and their enamel antagonistsThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2013