The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2011 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparative Evaluation of Resistance Failure in Nonprecious Metal-Ceramic Restoration at the Incisal Edge with Varying Thickness under Different Application of Load: An in vitro Study

Zinnie Nanda, Prasanna M Danappanavar, Mummidi Bhaskar, Vikas Gowd, Mallikarjun Molugu, K Amarendher Reddy, Rajiv Kumar Reddy, M Ashwini Kumar

Citation Information : Nanda Z, Danappanavar PM, Bhaskar M, Gowd V, Molugu M, Reddy KA, Reddy RK, Kumar MA. Comparative Evaluation of Resistance Failure in Nonprecious Metal-Ceramic Restoration at the Incisal Edge with Varying Thickness under Different Application of Load: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011; 12 (6):434-440.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1072

Published Online: 01-12-2011

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2011; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Objective

To determine the resistance failure value of nonprecious metal-ceramic restorations at the incisal edge with varying thickness under different application of load.

Materials and methods

An Ivorian central incisor was prepared to receive metal-ceramic crown, which was further duplicated, invested, casted and 72 metal dies were fabricated in Co-Cr alloy. Metal dies were relieved with die spacer, lubricated and wax patterns were prepared for metal copings, which were further invested and casted and 72 metal copings were fabricated. The ceramic materials were used for the study viz. Vita/VMK, IPSd SIGN, and superporcelain. Ceramic built-up was carried out according to manufacturer instructions. Incisal ceramic built-up was carried out with increasing thickness from 2.00 to 2.5 and 3.00 mm.

Results

A total of 72 samples, prepared for the study, were divided into two groups, i.e. group I (36 samples) and group II (36 samples), as per the direction of application of load. The samples were mounted on acrylic block (6 samples/block). A total 12 acrylic blocks were prepared. All the samples were tested using universal testing machine (MTS/USA). The load was applied with crosshead speed of 5 mm/min.

Conclusion

Fracture resistance was found to be highest for the 2.00 mm and lowest for 3.00 mm incisal ceramic thickness samples regardless of the ceramic material in both groups. There was a gradual decrease in fracture resistance as the incisal ceramic thickness increased from 2.00 to 3.00 mm in all samples. Fracture resistance was marginally higher for incisal ceramic build-up of 3 mm thickness on group II metal copings than on group I copings. Fracture resistance was highest for IPSd SIGN followed by that of Vita/VMK-95 and superporcelain.

Clinical significance

A 3.00 mm incisal ceramic thickness offered greater fracture resistance in comparison to lower values of incisal thickness; IPSd SIGN offered greatest fracture resistance followed by that of Vita/VMK-95 and superporcelain.

How to cite this article

Danappanavar PM, Nanda Z, Bhaskar M, Gowd V, Molugu M, Reddy KA, Reddy RK, Kumar MA. Comparative Evaluation of Resistance Failure in Nonprecious Metal-Ceramic Restoration at the Incisal Edge with Varying Thickness Under Different Application of Load: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(6):434-440.


PDF Share
  1. IPSd SIGN optimizing glass ceramic to metal adhesion for clinical success. Signature 2000;7:11-13.
  2. Influence of incisal length of ceramic and loading orientation of stress distribution in ceramic crown. J Dent Res 1988;67:1371-75.
  3. Porcelain fused to metal: Tooth preparation and coping design. J Prosthet Dent 1973;30:28-36.
  4. Shear stress measurement at a dental porcelain-Gold bond interface. J Dent Res 1971;1(2):626-33.
  5. The use and construction of gold crown with a fused porcelain veneer: A progress report. J Prostho dent, 1956;(6):811.
  6. Distribution of stresses in porcelain-fusedto-metal and porcelain jacket crowns. J Dent Res 1975;54:255-61.
  7. Perspectiveness in dental ceramics proceedings of fourth international symposium on ceramics. Quintessence Publishing 1989. p. 175-91.
  8. An in vitro comparison of two dowel and core techniques for endodontically treated molars. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:509-14.
  9. In vitro resistance of composite resin dowel and cores. J Endod 1988;14:300-04.
  10. Electroforming technology for galvanoceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1997;74:444-49.
  11. IPSd SIGN wear characteristics of a new fluorapatite-leucite glass ceramic. Signature 2000;7: 2-4.
  12. IPSd SIGN The philosophy and utilization of glass ceramic for metal. Signature 2000;7:5-10.
  13. IPSd SIGN. The evolution continues. Signature 2000;7:1.
  14. IPSd SIGN Parameters for achieving predictable Gingival aesthetics. Signature 2000;7:1.
  15. IPSd SIGN Parameters for achieving predictable Gingival aesthetics. Signature 2000;7:15.
  16. Science of dental materials (10th ed). WB Saunders: p. 66.
  17. Design of bond strength tests for metalceramic complexes: Review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:602-08.
  18. Metal-ceramic compatibility: A review of literature. J Prostho Dent 1990:63:21-25.
  19. A review strength properties of dental ceramics. J Prostho Dent 1992;67:859-65.
  20. Perspective in dental ceramics proceedings of fourth international symposium of ceramics. Quintessence Publishing 1989:53-64.
  21. In vitro study of fracture load and fracture pattern of ceramic crowns: A finite element and fractography analysis. J Prosthodont Aug 2011;20(6): 447-55.
  22. Influence of implant abutment angulations on the fracture resistance of overlaying CAM-milled zirconia single crowns. Aust Dent J Jun 2011;56(2):132-40.
  23. The effect of framework design on fracture resistance of metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns: Int J Prosthodont Jul-Aug 2010;23(4):350-52.
  24. The influence of incisal veneering porcelain thickness of two metal ceramic crown systems on failure resistance after cyclic loading: J Prosthet Dent May 2010;103(5):275-82.
  25. Porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained, cement-retained, and screw-cement-retained implant-supported metal ceramic posterior crowns. Prosthodont Jun 2010;19(4):263-73.
  26. Fracture resistance of metal-ceramic restorations with two different margin designs after exposure to masticatory simulation. J Prosthet Dent Sep 2009;102(3):172-78.
  27. Comparison of fracture resistance of pressable metal-ceramic custom implant abutments with CAD/CAM commercially fabricated zirconia implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent Apr 2009;101(4):226-30.
  28. Evaluation of load at fracture of Procera AllCeram copings using different luting cements. J Prosthodont Feb 2008;17(2):120-24. Epub 2007 Nov 28.
  29. Effect of different all-ceramic crown system on fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with and without glass fiber posts. J Endod Jul 2007;33(7):848-51. Epub 2007 Mar 26.
  30. : Fracture resistance of metal- and galvano-ceramic crowns cemented with different luting cements: in vitro comparative study. Int J Prosthodont Nov-Dec 2006;19(6):610-12.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.