Loading…
Fracture resistance of different implant supported ceramic abutment/crown systems
The purpose of this study was to investigate the fracture resistance and failure modes of different non-aged and aged abutment/crown systems. One hundred dental implants (diameter 4.3 mm and length 11.5 mm) were restored with five abutment/crown systems: G1: a lithium disilicate hybrid abutment crow...
Saved in:
Published in: | European oral research 2019-05, Vol.53 (2), p.80-87 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The purpose of this study was to investigate the fracture resistance and failure modes of different non-aged and aged abutment/crown systems.
One hundred dental implants (diameter 4.3 mm and length 11.5 mm) were restored with five abutment/crown systems: G1: a lithium disilicate hybrid abutment crown, G2: a lithium disilicate crown cemented on a lithium disilicate hybrid abutment, G3: a lithium disilicate crown cemented on a zirconia hybrid abutment, G4: a direct veneer porcelain layering on a zirconia hybrid abutment, and G5: a lithium disilicate crown cemented on a prefabricated all-zirconia abutment. Each group was divided into two groups (n=10) as control (non-aged) and thermomechanically aged. The fracture resistance test was performed. Failures during the aging process and after the fracture resistance test were examined.
Both of the factors (restoration type and aging) affected the fracture resistance values and there was not an interaction between the factors (p>0.05). When fracture resistance values were compared regardless of aging, the highest values were observed in G3 and G4, respectively (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2149-2352 2630-6158 2651-2823 2149-4592 |
DOI: | 10.26650/eor.20199657 |