A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content. Sign in or start your free trial.

Method Article

Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material

1.3K views

⸱

DOI:

10.3791/67511

⸱

December 20th, 2024

 ,  , 
1Center for Oral Bioengineering, Institute of Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, 2School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary University of London

In This Article

Summary

A quasistatic load-to-fracture test with a non-fixed stainless steel ball was developed to determine the fracture strength of minimally invasive posterior computer-aided design and manufacturing restorations cemented to dentin analog materials. This test models the typical loading regime responsible for the fracture of dental restorations.

Abstract

Under current minimally invasive treatment regimes, minor tooth preparation and thinner biomimetic ceramic restoration are used to preserve the restored tooth's vitality, aesthetics, and function. New computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic-like material are now available. To guarantee longevity, a dental clinician must know these newly launched product's mechanical strength compared to the relatively brittle glass-matrix ceramic. Furthermore, a tooth substitute has been promoted for laboratory investigation, especially after the pandemic, and more evidentiary support is required for its application.

This study developed a laboratory protocol for a monotonic load-to-fracture test to determine the fracture strength of 1 mm-thick CAD/CAM occlusal veneers. Master dies were milled from high-pressure fiberglass laminate, which has similar elastic modulus and bond strength as hydrated dentin. They were mounted into polyvinyl chloride (PVC) end caps with cold-curing epoxy resin. Occlusal veneers, also called tabletop restorations, were milled from lithium disilicate (LD) and resin nanoceramic blocks (RNC) and cemented to prepared master dies using dual-cured adhesive resin cement. They were allowed to cure fully by storing in distilled water for 48 h at 37 °C.

All samples were then placed in a universal testing machine and loaded via a non-fixed 5.5 mm stainless-steel ball that allows lateral movement as would occur against the antagonist teeth. Compression was applied at a 1 mm/min rate, and the load-displacement graph was generated. The average maximum load-bearing capacity of restorations in the RNC group (3,212.80 ± 558.67 N) was significantly higher than in the LD group (2727.10 ± 472.41 N) (p < 0.05). No debonding was found during the test. Both CAD/CAM materials may have a similar flaw distribution. Hertzian cone crack was found at the loading site, whereas radial cracks propagating from the cementation surface were found close to the margin in both groups.

Introduction

Metal-free restorations are now highly preferred in anterior and posterior dentition due to their excellent optical characteristics and biocompatibility1. However, the major drawback of such materials is their susceptibility to fracture2. Most ceramics are vulnerable to cracks generated by tensile stresses, even under low strain3. Fractures of dental ceramic prostheses usually develop from slow radial crack growth due to long-term exposure to the tensile stresses generated during chewing4. Their weaknesses escalate with intrinsic flaws or defects within the materials and extrinsic flaws from fabrication and postprocessing5. Flexural strength, the capability to withstand tensile stress, of dental CAD/CAM materials can be achieved and compared through standard tests such as uniaxial (3-point or 4-point bending) and biaxial bending tests (ball-on-ring, ring-on-ring, and piston-on-three balls). Meanwhile, fracture toughness, the capability of a material to resist crack growth, can be derived from a single-edged notch beam and an indentation test. However, these tests cannot entirely predict and represent the behavior of the cemented prostheses with different anatomical configurations6. Other monotonic or dynamic mechanical tests have been introduced to justify their performance with various clinical aspects7,8.

A load to fracture or "crunch the crown" test has been used extensively in dentistry to investigate and compare the strengths of ceramic restorations with complex geometries9,10. Monotonic uniaxial compression is quasistatically exerted on the restorations in a vertical or lateral direction until a catastrophic fracture occurs. The fracture strength of the material can be determined from the maximum loading force, whereas the modes of fracture, including the site and direction of the crack(s), can be examined microscopically. A good restoration should be able to withstand both compressive and tensile stress from the voluntary maximum bite force, the highest masticatory force generated by jaw-elevator muscles under the influence of craniomandibular biomechanics and the reflex pathway11,12, which could be up to 900 N in the posterior teeth3. Furthermore, bruxism can involuntarily increase the force to 1,200 N in the same region13. In addition to material properties (i.e., elastic modulus), geometries, thicknesses, adhesive cement, and defect distributions influence any prosthesis's strength14. However, arguments have been raised on the clinical relevance of such tests due to the nonclinical high forces and the failure mechanisms being dissimilar to clinical situations6,14. A fatigue resistance test involving step-stress analysis and intraoral condition may be a more realistic approach for predicting the longevity of dental restorations7. Nevertheless, the load to fracture is still a quick, simple, and repeatable in vitro test to compare the strengths of new CAD/CAM ceramics materials launched onto the market where the manufacturer's data may not be dependable15,16,17. The result may reflect the prosthesis's tolerance to extreme forces from parafunction activities and unexpected clinical situations such as biting on hard seeds or gravels, which also causes failure in dental prostheses18,19,20,21.

With their increasing use to rehabilitate posterior teeth, the mechanical performance of occlusal veneers made from milled and printed CAD/CAM materials has been investigated for various aspects, including types of materials, prosthetic designs, tooth abutment preparation design, thicknesses, surface treatments, adhesive bonding, and luting cement system22,23. However, the data are still limited, and the test materials are from glass matrix ceramic and conventional CAD/CAM composite materials. An alternative hybrid material, resin nanoceramic, is now available. It claims to incorporate the strength of nanoceramic fillers and resiliency from resin matrix, which may be suitable for thin, minimally invasive restoration. However, its mechanical performance, especially in the molar region, requires more supporting evidence for clinical implications.

Until now, researchers have not had materials that can substitute for natural teeth in laboratory testing. High-pressure fiberglass laminate (National Electrical Manufacturers Association; NEMA grade G10) with the tradename of Garolite has been proposed as a dentin analog material for the mechanical testing of dental ceramics since 201014. It is a thermoset composite material comprising multilayers of fiberglass soaked in epoxy resin under high pressure. It can withstand high-stress conditions with similar elastic properties, fatigue behavior, and adhesive bond strengths as hydrated dentin14,24. It provides advantages over natural teeth regarding specimen preparation, standardization, and ethical authorization, with time savings due to reduced biosafety concerns24. Surface treatment can be performed by etching with 5% or 10% hydrofluoric acid from 60 s to 90 s and applying a silane coupling agent14,24. Nevertheless, studies on cemented prostheses with this material are limited, and the reliability of the existing evidence is still questionable24,25.

In this study, a laboratory protocol for a monotonic load-to-fracture test of 1 mm-thick occlusal veneers cemented to the master dies milled from dentin analog material against a nonfixed stainless steel ball was developed. The maximum load-bearing capacities of two dental CAD/CAM materials: lithium disilicate (LD) - IPS e.max CAD and resin nanoceramic (RNC) - Lava Ultimate, with n = 15 per group, were quantified and statistically compared through a two-sample independent t-test and Weibull statistical analysis. The fracture patterns were also investigated under optical stereomicroscopy and scanning electron microscopy. The study hypothesis was that this was an appropriate method of modeling the failure of occlusal veneers in clinical applications. The statistical null hypothesis was that there should be no difference in the maximum load-bearing capacities between the occlusal veneers made from the two materials.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Protocol

1. Tooth analog fabrication

  1. Anatomically reduce the occlusal surface of a typodont mandibular first molar (with bifurcated root) by 1 mm and bevel the margin using coarse and fine diamond burs.
  2. Scan the prepared typodont with a dental laboratory scanner.
  3. Open the scanned file with OrthoAnalyzer in the CAD software. On the Sculpt toolkit window, click on the Wax knife tool and set its diameter and level as 2.6 mm and 63 μm, respectively. Gradually pull each root surface toward each other to merge the bifurcated roots into a single root to facilitate the milling process (Figure 1).
  4. Mill the tooth analog dies from a high-pressure fiberglass laminate (n = 30) (Garolite, National Electrical Manufacturers Association [NEMA] grade G10) using a five-axis milling machine (Figure 2).

2. Mounting

  1. Use any appropriate CAD software (e.g., Autodesk Inventor Professional 2025) to design a jig that fits the root section of the model tooth and the space inside the PVC end caps to ensure standardized position and orientation of the test specimen.
  2. Print one jig per test toot in PMMA or similar modulus material using a 3D printer.
  3. Combine the root parts and dies with the PVC end cap, typically 25 mm in inner diameter, 21.5 mm high, and 5.5 mm in wall thickness.
  4. Mix the cold-curing low-viscosity epoxy resin and pour it up to the cementoenamel junction region of the model teeth. Be careful not to contaminate the occlusal surface of the model teeth with the flowing resin. Leave to fully set at room temperature for at least 24 h (Figure 3).

3. Occlusal veneer fabrication

  1. Import the scanned file of tooth analog to the CAD software.
  2. Under Directions, determine the insertion direction of the occlusal veneer.
  3. Under Interfaces, select Margin line and mark the margin line of the scanned tooth analog. Then, select Die interface | Advance settings and adjust the cement gap to 0.025 mm and the extra cement gap to 0.050 mm.
  4. Under Anatomy design, design a 1 mm-thick occlusal veneer using a template from Smile Library and adjust it with tools in Sculpt.
  5. Mill the lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) and resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate) blocks (n=15 per group) using a five-axis milling machine and following the manufacturer's instructions (Figure 4).

4. Bonding and cementation

  1. Clean all master dies for 90 s in an ultrasonic machine and air dry. Then, apply 5% hydrofluoric acid to the occlusal surface for 60 s, thoroughly rinse with water, and air dry.
  2. For the LD group, etch the internal surface with 5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s, thoroughly rinse with water, and air dry.
  3. For the RNC group, air-abrade with aluminum oxide powder grain size 50 µm at 2 bars (200 kPa, 30 psi) for 10 s. Remove excess sand with alcohol and air dry.
  4. Apply silane, a universal bonding agent, and load dual-cured adhesive cement to the restoration intaglio. Place the restoration onto the prepared master dies by loading them under a silicone-filled compression head in an universal testing machine with a 40 N load.
  5. Cure with a light-emitting diode (LED) using light intensity in the normal mode of 1,000-1,200 mW/cm2 for 1-2 s. Remove excess cement, continue the curing light on each surface for 20 s, and leave it in the universal testing machine for 5 min.
  6. Remove from the universal testing machine and leave in distilled water at 37 °C for 48 h to allow the cement to fully cure.
  7. Before testing, use fine permanent markers to draw three medial-lateral reference lines (sinistral, central, and dextral) and three anterior-posterior reference lines (upper, central, and lower) in different colors using fine permanent markers.

5. Quasistatic mechanical testing

  1. Position the test specimen in the center of the lower platen of a mechanical testing machine with a 5 kN load cell set up for compression testing.
  2. Place a 5.5 mm diameter stainless-steel ball in the central fossa of the restoration at the intersection of the central reference lines (Figure 5).
  3. Place a protective acrylic ring around the specimen and a debris shield in front of the testing machine to limit flying debris.
  4. Bring the crosshead down until nearly in contact with the steel ball and zero load and displacement.
  5. Apply compression at 1 mm/min until the restoration fractures, indicated by a sudden drop in the load. Record this load (Figure 5).
  6. After fracture, remove the shield and the acrylic ring, and carefully collect the test specimen and its fragments. The colored lines assist in placing the ceramic fragments into their original positions for subsequent analysis (Figure 5).
  7. Place the next test specimen and follow steps 5.2-5.6 until the groups are complete.

6. Statistical analysis

  1. Fill in Minitab worksheets with material codes and maximum loading values (N) retrieved from the experiment in the first and second columns, respectively.
  2. Conduct an independent t-test for two samples by selecting Stat | Basic Statistics | 2-sample t. Set the confidence level at 95% and assume equal variances.
  3. Create the Weibull distribution plot by selecting Stat | Reliability/Survival | Distribution Analysis (Right Censoring) | Distribution ID Plot. Choose maximum loading values in the Variable box, tick and choose material names in the By variable box, specify distribution as Weibull, and click OK.
  4. Conduct the Weibull statistical analysis by selecting Stat | Reliability/Survival | Distribution Analysis (Right Censoring) | Parametric Distribution Analysis | Weibull | Graphs. Choose the Probability plot | Display confidence intervals on above plots and click OK.

7. Fractographic analysis

  1. For stereo microscopy, mount the eyepiece camera and capture images (20x) of the samples' aerial and side views via the stereomicroscopy software.
  2. For scanning electron microscopy, cut the specimen to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), put it in an acetone bath in an ultrasonic cleaner and then air dry. Gold-coat and capture images (250-300 magnification) of the samples' aerial and side views.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Results

The sample size calculation was performed using the referenced software, which generated an effect size of 0.39 and suggested a minimum sample size of n = 13 per group. However, a sample size of n = 15 was chosen in this study to detect the difference of 5%. The null hypothesis was rejected. Despite having greater flexural strength, the mean values of the maximum loading force of the 1 mm-thick occlusal veneers (n = 15 per group) made from the LD (lithium disilicate: 2,727.10 ± 472.41 N) group were significantly lower th...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Discussion

In recent years, minimally invasive occlusal veneers have increasingly received attention in contemporary restorative dentistry. These restorations are usually fabricated from monolithic CAD/CAM glass-matrix ceramic, polycrystalline, and hybrid materials26. Conservative tooth preparation, the ease of access and visibility during tooth preparation, impression taking and cementation, and preservation of the marginal gingiva have been promoted as advantages26,

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Disclosures

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Acknowledgements

This study has received funding from the Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. The authors thank Dr Erica Di Federico from School of Engineering and Materials Science and Dr Thomas Kelly from School of Geography at Queen Mary University of London for their expert technical inputs & guidance in this work.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Materials

List of materials used in this article
NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
3D printing (SLA) Formlabs, Somerville, MA, USAForm3+
3Shape Dental Designer CAD software 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, DenmarkCAD software for tooth analog and veneers
5% hydrofluoric acid Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, LiechtensteinIPS Ceramic Etching Gel
Alumina powderRonvig Dental Mfg. A/S, Daugaard, Denmark
Bluehill Universal materials testing software Instron Mechanical Testing Systems, Norwood, MA, USA
CamLabLite software Bresser UK Ltd, Kent, UKStereomicroscopy Software
Cold-curing low-viscosity epoxy resin Struers SAS, Champigny-sur-Marne, France
Dual-cure resin cement 3M, Saint Paul, MN, USARely X Ultimate Adhesive Resin Cement
Eyepiece camera ToupTek Photonics Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China
High-pressure fibreglass laminate discs  (G10)PAR Group Ltd, Lancashire, UK
IPS e.max CADIvoclar Vivadent, Schaan, LiechtensteinYB54G9/605330Low translucency, A3, C14
Laboratory scanner 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, DenmarkD900L
Lava Ultimate3M ESPE, Saint Paul, MN, USA9541467/3314A3-LTLow translucency, A3, 14L
Light-emitting diode (LED) curing light Woodpecker Medical Instrument, Guilin, China
Milling machine VHF camfacture AG, Amnnerbuch, GermanyVHF S2
Minitab 18 Minitab Inc, State College, PA, USA
nQuery Advisor Version 9.2.10 Statistical Solutions Ltd., CA, USAStatistical Software
Polyvinyl chloride end cap Plastic Pipe Shop Ltd, Stirling, UK25 mm X 21.5 mm;
Scanning electron microscope Tescan, Brno, Czech RepublicTescan Vega
Silane coupling agent 3M, Saint Paul, MN, USARelyX Ceramic Primer
Autodesk Inventor Professional 2024Autodesk, San Francisco, CA, USACAD software for jig
Sputter vacuum coater  Quorum, East Sussex, UKMiniQS Sputter Coater
Stata18 StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX, USA
Stereomicroscope Carl Zeiss AG, Oberkoche, GermanyZeiss Stemi 508
Typodont mandibular first molar Frasaco GmbH, Tettnang, GermanyANA-4 Z3RN-36
Universal dental bonding agent  3M, Saint Paul, MN, USAScotch Bond Universal Adhesive
Universal testing machineInstron Mechanical Testing Systems, Norwood, MA, USAIntron 5900-84 

References

  1. Makhija, S. K., et al. Dentist material selection for single-unit crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. J Dent. 55, 40-47 (2016).
  2. Shenoy, A., Shenoy, N. Dental ceramics: An update. J Conserv Dent. 13 (4), 195-203 (2010).
  3. Anusavice, K. J., Shen, C., Rawls, H. R. Phillips' Science of Dental Materials. 12th Edition, Saunders. , 12th Edition, Saunders. (2013).
  4. Thompson, V. P., Rekow, D. E. Dental ceramics and the molar crown testing ground. J Appl Oral Sci. 12 (spe), 26-36 (2004).
  5. Zhang, Y., Sailer, I., Lawn, B. R. Fatigue of dental ceramics. J Dent. 41 (12), 1135-1147 (2013).
  6. Kelly, J. R. Clinically relevant approach to failure testing of all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 81 (6), 652-661 (1999).
  7. Valandro, L. F., Cadore-Rodrigues, A. C., Dapieve, K. S., Machry, R. V., Pereira, G. K. R. A brief review on fatigue test of ceramic and some related matters in Dentistry. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 138, 105607(2023).
  8. Selvaraj, H., et al. Systematic review fracture resistance of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with fiber reinforced composites- a systematic review. BMC Oral Health. 23 (1), 566(2023).
  9. Josephson, B. A., Schulman, A., Dunn, Z. A., Hurwitz, W. A compressive strength study of an all-ceramic crown. J Prosthet Dent. 53 (3), 301-303 (1985).
  10. Josephson, B. A., Schulman, A., Dunn, Z. A., Hurwitz, W. A compressive strength study of complete ceramic crowns. Part II. J Prosthet Dent. 65 (3), 388-391 (1991).
  11. Bakke, M. Bite force and occlusion. Semin Orthod. 12 (2), 120-126 (2006).
  12. Koc, D., Dogan, A., Bek, B. Bite force and influential factors on bite force measurements: a literature review. Eur J Dent. 4 (2), 223-232 (2010).
  13. Flanagan, D. Bite force and dental implant treatment: a short review. Med Devices (Auckl). 10, 141-148 (2017).
  14. Kelly, J. R., Rungruanganunt, P., Hunter, B., Vailati, F. Development of a clinically validated bulk failure test for ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 104 (4), 228-238 (2010).
  15. Alghazzawi, T. F. Flexural strengths, failure load, and hardness of glass-ceramics for dental applications. J Prosthet Dent. 128 (3), 512.e1-512.e9 (2022).
  16. Alghazzawi, T. F. Relation of crown failure load to flexural strength for three contemporary dental polymers. Polymers (Basel). 15 (21), 4312(2023).
  17. Alghazzawi, T. F., Janowski, G. M., Eberhardt, A. W. An experimental study of flexural strength and hardness of zirconia and their relation to crown failure loads. J Prosthet Dent. 131 (2), 320-328 (2024).
  18. Peterson, I. M., Pajares, A., Lawn, B. R., Thompson, V. P., Rekow, E. D. Mechanical characterization of dental ceramics by hertzian contacts. J Dent Res. 77 (4), 589-602 (1998).
  19. Johansson, A., Omar, R., Carlsson, G. E. Bruxism and prosthetic treatment: A critical review. J Prosthodont Res. 55 (3), 127-136 (2011).
  20. Reitemeier, B., Hänsel, K., Kastner, C., Weber, A., Walter, M. H. A prospective 10-year study of metal ceramic single crowns and fixed dental prosthesis retainers in private practice settings. J Prosthet Dent. 109 (3), 149-155 (2013).
  21. Marchan, S. M., Joseph Smith, W. A. A Preliminary investigation into the dietary and oral practices associated with fractured teeth and prostheses in a Trinidadian population. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 8 (5), 402-408 (2018).
  22. Albelasy, E., Hamama, H. H., Tsoi, J. K. H., Mahmoud, S. H. Influence of material type, thickness and storage on fracture resistance of CAD/CAM occlusal veneers. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 119, 104485(2021).
  23. Ladino, L., Sanjuan, M. E., Valdez, D. J., Eslava, R. A. Clinical and biomechanical performance of occlusal veneers: A scoping review. J Contemp Dent Pract. 22 (11), 1327-1337 (2021).
  24. Chen, Y., et al. Which dentine analogue material can replace human dentine for crown fatigue test. Dent Mater. 39 (1), 86-100 (2023).
  25. Dalla-Nora, F., Da Rosa, L. S., Pereira, G. K. R., Valandro, L. F., Rippe, M. P. Is dentin analogue material a viable substitute for human dentin in fatigue behavior studies. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 150, 106312(2024).
  26. Ladino, L., Sanjuan, M., Valdéz, D., Eslava, R. Clinical and biomechanical performance of occlusal veneers: A scoping review. J Contemp Dent Pract. 22, 1327-1337 (2022).
  27. Edelhoff, D., Ahlers, M. O. Occlusal onlays as a modern treatment concept for the reconstruction of severely worn occlusal surfaces. Quintessence Int. 49 (7), 521-533 (2018).
  28. Gierthmuehlen, P. C., Spitznagel, F. A., Koschate, M., Bonfante, E. A., Prott, L. S. Influence of ceramic thickness and dental substrate on the survival rate and failure load of non-retentive occlusal veneers after fatigue. J Esthet Restor Dent. 36 (2), 373-380 (2024).
  29. Politano, G., Van Meerbeek, B., Peumans, M. Nonretentive bonded ceramic partial crowns: Concept and simplified protocol for long-lasting dental restorations. J Adhes Dent. 20 (6), 495-510 (2018).
  30. Alghauli, M., Alqutaibi, A. Y., Wille, S., Kern, M. Clinical outcomes and influence of material parameters on the behavior and survival rate of thin and ultrathin occlusal veneers: A systematic review. J Prosthodont Res. 67 (1), 45-54 (2023).
  31. Jurado, C. A., Tsujimoto, A., Molisani, J., Fu, C. C., Sadid-Zadeh, R. Fracture resistance of chairside CAD-CAM lithium disilicate occlusal veneer with various designs after mechanical aging. J Prosthodont. , (2024).
  32. Willard, A., Gabriel Chu, T. -M. The science and application of IPS e.Max dental ceramic. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 34 (4), 238-242 (2018).
  33. Lawson, N. C., Bansal, R., Burgess, J. O. Wear, strength, modulus and hardness of CAD/CAM restorative materials. Dent Mater. 32 (11), e275-e283 (2016).
  34. Sonmez, N., et al. Evaluation of five CAD/CAM materials by microstructural characterization and mechanical tests: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 18 (1), 5(2018).
  35. Maeder, M., et al. Load-bearing capacities of ultra-thin occlusal veneers bonded to dentin. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 95, 165-171 (2019).
  36. Ioannidis, A., et al. Ultra-thin occlusal veneers bonded to enamel and made of ceramic or hybrid materials exhibit load-bearing capacities not different from conventional restorations. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 90, 433-440 (2019).
  37. Andrade, J. P., et al. Effect of different computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials and thicknesses on the fracture resistance of occlusal veneers. Oper Dent. 43 (5), 539-548 (2018).
  38. Rees, J. S., Jacobsen, P. H. The elastic moduli of enamel and dentine. Clin Mater. 14 (1), 35-39 (1993).
  39. Schlichting, L. H., Maia, H. P., Baratieri, L. N., Magne, P. Novel-design ultra-thin CAD/CAM composite resin and ceramic occlusal veneers for the treatment of severe dental erosion. J Prosthet Dent. 105 (4), 217-226 (2011).
  40. Magne, P., Schlichting, L. H., Maia, H. P., Baratieri, L. N. In vitro fatigue resistance of CAD/CAM composite resin and ceramic posterior occlusal veneers. J Prosthet Dent. 104 (3), 149-157 (2010).
  41. Quinn, J. B., Quinn, G. D. A practical and systematic review of Weibull statistics for reporting strengths of dental materials. Dent Mater. 26 (2), 135-147 (2010).
  42. British Standards Institution. BS61649: Weibull analysis. , British Standards Institution. London. (2009).
  43. Sadighpour, L., Geramipanah, F., Raeesi, B. In vitro mechanical tests for modern dental ceramics. Front Dent. 3 (3), 143-152 (1970).
  44. Constantin, A. Human subject research: International and regional human rights standards. Health Hum Rights. 20 (2), 137-148 (2018).
  45. Zafar, M. S. Prosthodontic applications of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA): An update. Polymers (Basel). 12 (10), 2299(2020).
  46. Dal Piva, A. O., Tribst, J. P., Borges, A. L., de Melo, R. M., Bottino, M. A. Influence of substrate design for in vitro mechanical testing. J Clin Exp Dent. 11 (2), e119-e125 (2019).
  47. Zhang, Y., Kim, J. W., Bhowmick, S., Thompson, V. P., Rekow, E. D. Competition of fracture mechanisms in monolithic dental ceramics: flat model systems. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 88 (2), 402-411 (2009).
  48. Corazza, P. H., Feitosa, S. A., Borges, A. L., Della Bona, A. Influence of convergence angle of tooth preparation on the fracture resistance of Y-TZP-based all-ceramic restorations. Dent Mater. 29 (3), 339-347 (2013).
  49. Omori, S., Komada, W., Yoshida, K., Miura, H. Effect of thickness of zirconia-ceramic crown frameworks on strength and fracture pattern. Dent Mater J. 32 (1), 189-194 (2013).
  50. Alammari, M. R., Abdelnabi, M. H., Swelem, A. A. Effect of total occlusal convergence on fit and fracture resistance of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate crowns. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 11, 1-8 (2019).
  51. Schuyler, C. H. Freedom in centric. Dent Clin N Am. 13 (3), 681-686 (1969).
  52. Tiwari, B., Ladha, K., Lalit, A., Dwarakananda Naik, B. Occlusal concepts in full mouth rehabilitation: an overview. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 14 (4), 344-351 (2014).
  53. Skjold, A., Schriwer, C., Gjerdet, N. R., Øilo, M. Fractographic analysis of 35 clinically fractured bi-layered and monolithic zirconia crowns. J Dent. 125, 104271(2022).
  54. Øilo, M., Gjerdet, N. R. Fractographic analyses of all-ceramic crowns: A study of 27 clinically fractured crowns. Dent Mater. 29 (6), e78-e84 (2013).

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Reprints and Permissions

Explore More Articles

CAD/CAM RestorationsFracture StrengthResin NanoceramicLithium DisilicateUniversal Testing MachineCompression TestingStereo Microscopy
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Contact Us
Recommend to Library

Privacy

Terms of Use

Policies

Copyright © 2026 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved.