Brittleness index of machinable dental materials and its relation to the marginal chipping factor

OBJECTIVES: The machinability of a material can be measured with the calculation of its brittleness index (BI). It is possible that different materials with different BI could produce restorations with varied marginal integrity. The degree of marginal chipping of a milled restoration can be estimated by the calculation of the marginal chipping factor (CF). The aim of this study is to investigate any possible correlation between the BI of machinable dental materials and the CF of the final restorations. METHODS: The CERECTM system was used to mill a wide range of materials used with that system; namely the Paradigm MZ100TM (3M/ESPE), Vita Mark II (VITA), ProCAD (Ivoclar-Vivadent) and IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar-Vivadent). A Vickers hardness Tester was used for the calculation of BI, while for the calculation of CF the percentage of marginal chipping of crowns prepared with bevelled marginal angulations was estimated. RESULTS: The results of this study showed that Paradigm MZ100 had the lowest BI and CF, while IPS e.max CAD demonstrated the highest BI and CF. Vita Mark II and ProCAD had similar BI and CF and were lying between the above materials. Statistical analysis of the results showed that there is a perfect positive correlation between BI and CF for all the materials. CONCLUSIONS: The BI and CF could be both regarded as indicators of a material’s machinability. Within the limitations of this study it was shown that as the BI increases so does the potential for marginal chipping, indicating that the BI of a material can be used as a predictor of the CF

Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns

Objective This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns. Material and Methods An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone “PEEK”, Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0. Results The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (P0.05). Conclusions CAD/CAM fabricated provisional crowns demonstrated superior fit and better strength than direct provisional crowns

Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns

bjective This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns. Material and Methods An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone “PEEK”, Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0. Results The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (

Evaluation of the marginal fit of three margin designs of resin composite crowns using CAD/CAM

OBJECTIVES: To examine the marginal fit of resin composite crowns manufactured with the CEREC 3 system employing three different margin designs; bevel, chamfer and shoulder, by means of a replica technique and a luting agent. METHODS: Three master casts were fabricated from an impression of a typodont molar tooth and a full-coverage crown prepared with a marginal finish of a bevel, a chamfer and a shoulder. Each cast was replicated 10 times (n = 10). Scanning of the replicas and crown designing was performed using the CEREC ScanTM system. The crowns were milled from Paradigm MZ100TM composite resin blocks. The marginal fit of the crowns was evaluated with a replica technique (AquasilTM LV, Dentsply), and with a resin composite cement (RelyXTM Unicem, AplicapTM) and measured with a travelling microscope. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA. RESULTS: For the replica technique the average marginal gaps recorded were: Bevel Group 105±34 mm, Chamfer Group 94±27 mm and Shoulder Group 91±22 mm. For the resin composite cement the average marginal gaps were: Bevel Group 102±28 mm, Chamfer Group 91±11 mm and Shoulder Group 77±8 mm. Two-way ANOVA analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups of finishing lines regardless of the cementation technique used. CONCLUSIONS: The marginal gap of resin composite crowns manufactured with the CEREC 3 system is within the range of clinical acceptance, regardless of the finishing line prepared or the cementation technique used

Confounding Factors Affecting the Marginal Quality of an Intra-Oral Scan

Objectives: To assess the effect of clinical factors on the quality of intra-oral scans of crown margins. These factors are; presence of adjacent teeth, proximity to gingivae, encumbrance of wand positioning within oral cavity. Methods: A typodont lower molar (Frasaco, Germany) was prepared for an all-ceramic crown with 1.5 mm supraginigival (lingual) and equigingival (buccal) margins. The tooth was scanned in a model scanner, creating a master scan. An intra-oral scanner (IOS) (Omnicam, Sirona Dental) was used to acquire sets of 5 scans each, under varying conditions; (1) the presence/absence of adjacent teeth, (2) model mounted in manikin head/hand-held, (3) with/without a 1 mm shim to elevate the margin. Every combination was investigated, yielding 40 scans (8 groups of 5). The master scan margin was identified by selecting the highest curvature region (>1.8). The master was aligned to each IOS scan, and 4 regions of each IOS scan margin were extracted, lying within 100 μm of predefined mesial, distal, buccal and lingual sections of the master margin. The mean curvature of each margin section was calculated using Meshlab. The effect of each confounding factor on margin curvature was analysed using ANOVA. Results: Lingual margin curvature remained consistent regardless of scanning conditions. Buccal margin curvature was significantly affected when located equigingivally. Mesial margin curvature was significantly affected in the presence of adjacent teeth and proximity to the gingivae. Distal margin curvature was significantly affected by all three confounding factors. Conclusions: The curvature (sharpness) of the margin recorded by a commercial IOS is significantly affected by clinical factors obscuring visibility

Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to composite submitted to different surface pretreatments

Objectives: Extensively destroyed teeth are commonly restored with composite resin before cavity preparation for indirect restorations. The longevity of the restoration can be related to the proper bonding of the resin cement to the composite. This study aimed to evaluate the microshear bond strength of two self-adhesive resin cements to composite resin. Material and Methods: Composite discs were subject to one of six different surface pretreatments: none (control), 35% phosphoric acid etching for 30 seconds (PA), application of silane (silane), PA + silane, PA + adhesive, or PA + silane + adhesive (n = 6). A silicone mold containing a cylindrical orifice (1 mm2 diameter) was placed over the composite resin. RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE) or BisCem (Bisco Inc.) self-adhesive resin cement was inserted into the orifices and light-cured. Self-adhesive cement cylinders were submitted to shear loading. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). Results: Independent of the cement used, the PA + Silane + Adhesive group showed higher microshear bond strength than those of the PA and PA + Silane groups. There was no difference among the other treatments. Unicem presented higher bond strength than BisCem for all experimental conditions. Conclusions: Pretreatments of the composite resin surface might have an effect on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to this substrate

Development of new tooth preparation guidelines forminimal CAD-CAM fabricated resin bonded indirect restorations

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo