All ETDs from UAB

Advisory Committee Chair

Nathaniel Lawson

Advisory Committee Members

Daniel Givan

Perng-Ru Liu

Keith Kinderknecht

Document Type

Thesis

Date of Award

2018

Degree Name by School

Master of Science in Dentistry (MScD) School of Dentistry

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objectives: To measure and compare crown fracture load of a new translucent zirconia. Methods: 72 Standarized crown preparations were designed with AutoCAD software with a 0.8mm shoulder margin and 1 mm incisal-cervical marginal curvature. A stylized crown with a 1mm thickness and 0.8mm minimum thickness in the central pit was designed in 3shape software. Tooth dies were milled out of a resin composite (Crystal Ultra) that has a similar modulus as dentin (Modulus 10 GPa). Crowns were fabricated and prepared into the following groups: 24 crowns of translucent zirconia (Lava Esthetic, 3M), 8 bonded with resin cement (Group 1), 8 alumina particle abraded bonded with a resin cement (Group 4) and 8 cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer (Group 7); 24 crowns out of traditional zirconia (Lava Plus, 3M) 8 bonded with resin cement (Group 2), 8 alumina particle abraded bonded with a resin cement (Group 5) and 8 cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer (Group 8); 24 crowns out of lithium disilicate (e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent), 8 bonded with resin cement (Group 3), 8 etched with 5% hydrofluoric acid and silane application bonded with a resin cement (Group 6) and 8 cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer (Group 9). All the crowns were load cycled for 100,000 cycles at 100 N force in a custom fatigue device. Specimens were loaded against a stainless steel ball that made contact with the stylized crowns on each of the four cusps. All fatiguing was performed in 24 C water. The crowns were then fractured in a universal testing machine (MTS). The load was applied with a stainless steel indenter (7mm radius) with a loading rate of 1 mm/min. A 1.5mm rubber sheet was placed between the indenter and the crown to be distributed the load and simulate a food bolus. Results: Lava Plus bonded with self-adhesive resin cement (Group 2) showed the highest values 5383.5 +/- 713.0, followed by Lava Plus with sandblast treatment and bonded with a self-adhesive resin cement (Group 5) 5272.2 +/- 383.2. The lowest value was shown by Lava Esthetic cemented with a RMGI (Group 7) 3007.4 +/- 320.8c. The crowns milled out of e.max CAD (Group 9) failed the during the load cycle test. Conclusions: The strength of Lava Esthetic and e.max CAD are about 2/3 that of Lava Plus when bonded with a resin cement. All materials are strengthened when bonded with a resin cement. When bonded with a resin cement, Lava Esthetic is not weakened with sandblasting. When cemented with a RMGI cement, Lava Esthetic shows a lower fatigue resistance when sandblasted than when sandblasting is omitted. When cemented with a RMGI cement, Lava Esthetic showed a better fatigue resistance than e.max CAD.

Included in

Dentistry Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.