Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Create dental-restoration-material-ceramic-composite-polymer-resin-2.txt #47

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2023
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of restoration thickness, CAD/CAM material, and 6 months of artificial saliva storage on the fracture resistance of occlusal veneers. MATERIALS AND
METHODS: A total of 84 intact maxillary molars were sectioned 4.0 mm occlusal to the cementoenamel junction to expose the dentine. The teeth were assigned into 3 main groups according to the type of restorative material (e.max CAD, Vita Enamic, and Lava Ultimate). In each group, the teeth were allocated into 2 subgroups (n = 14) according to restoration thickness (1.0 and 1.5 mm). The veneers were adhesively bonded using dual-cure self-adhesive luting agent. A total of 42 specimens comprising half the tested subgroups were stored in distilled water for 24-h before the test. The remaining half was stored in artificial saliva at 37 ± 1 °C in an incubator for 6 months. All specimens (n = 84) were subjected to 5000 thermal cycles between 5 and 55 °C ± 2 before the fracture resistance test. The maximum force at fracture was recorded in Newton. Failure mode was analyzed using a stereomicroscope. The results were analyzed using a parametric Three-way ANOVA test.
RESULTS: The results of the Three-way ANOVA test revealed that material type and restoration thickness significantly affected fracture resistance values (p < 0.5), while 6 months of storage in artificial saliva had no significant effect on mean fracture resistance values (p˃0.5). The most common failure patterns in CAD/CAM resin composite and polymer-infiltrated ceramics were scores I and score II. For glass ceramic groups, score IV and III were more dominant.
CONCLUSIONS: All the tested CAD/CAM restorations in both thicknesses exhibited fracture resistance values exceeding normal and parafunctional bite forces. Polymer-infiltrated ceramics and CAD/CAM resin composite veneers showed more favorable fracture patterns.