Influence of core thickness and artificial aging on the biaxial flexural strength of different all-ceramic materials: An in-vitro study
Source abstract
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the flexural strength of all-ceramics with varying core thicknesses submitted to aging. In-Ceram Alumina (IC), IPS e.max Press (EM) and Katana (K) (n=40), were selected. Each group contained two core groups based on the core thickness as follows: IC/0.5, IC/0.8, EM/0.5, EM/0.8, K/0.5 and K/0.8 mm in thickness (n=20 each). Ten specimens from each group were subjected to aging and all specimens were tested for strength in a testing machine either with or without being subjected aging. The mean strength of the K were higher (873.05 MPa) than that of the IC (548.28 MPa) and EM (374.32 MPa) regardless of core thickness. Strength values increased with increasing core thickness for all IC, EM and K regardless of aging. Results of this study concluded that strength was not significantly affected by aging. Different core thicknesses affected strength of the all-ceramic materials tested (p<0.05).
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental Research and COVID-19
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Prosthodontics, Corlu State Hospital
Department of Prosthodontics, Center for Dental Sciences, Health Sciences University
Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul Aydin University Faculty of Dentistry
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) Studart AR, Filser F, Kocker P, Gauckler LJ. In vitro lifetime of dental ceramics under cyclic loading in water. Biomaterials 2007; 28: 2695-2705.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.12.033 ↗
2. 2) Aboushelib MN, de Jager N, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Effect of loading method on the fracture mechanics of two layered all-ceramic restorative systems. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 952-959.10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.036 ↗
3. 3) Drummond JL, King TJ, Bapna MS, Koperski RD. Mechanical property evaluation of pressable restorative ceramics. Dent Mater 2000; 16: 226-233.10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00013-0 ↗
4. 4) Kelly JR, Nishimura I, Campbell SD. Ceramics in dentistry: historical roots and current perspectives. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75: 18-32.10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90413-8 ↗
5. 5) McLean JW. Evalution of dental ceramics in the twentieth century. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 61-66.10.1067/mpr.2001.112545 ↗
6. 6) Lin WS, Ercoli C, Feng C, Morton D. The effect of core material, veneering porcelain and fabrication technique on the biaxial flexural strength and weibull analysis of selected dental ceramics. J Prosthodont 2012; 21: 353-362.10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00845.x ↗
7. 7) Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesung IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98: 389-404.10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60124-3 ↗
8. 8) Seghi RR, Sorensen JA. Relative flexural strength of six new ceramic materials. Int J Prosthodont 1995; 8: 239-246.
9. 9) Alshehri AS. An investigation into the role of core porcelain thickness and lamination in determining the flexural strength of In-Ceram dental materials. J Prosthodont 2011; 20: 261-266.10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00707.x ↗
10. 10) Itinoche KM, Özcan M, Bottino MA, Oyafuso D. Effect of mechanical cycling on the flexural strength of densely sintered ceramics. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 1029-1034.10.1016/j.dental.2005.11.025 ↗
11. 11) Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Luthy H, Hammerle CH. Five year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20: 383-388.
12. 12) Molin MK, Karlsson SL. Five-year clinical prospective evaluation of zirconia based Denzir 3-unit FPDs. Int J Prosthodont 2008; 21: 223-227.
13. 13) Alghazzawi TF, Lemons J, Liu PR, Essig ME, Bartolucci AA, Janowski GM. Influence of low-temperature environmental exposure on the mechanical properties and structural stability of dental zirconia. J Prosthodont 2012; 21: 363-369.10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00838.x ↗
14. 14) Ghazy MH, Madina MM, Aboushelib MN. Influence of fabrication techniques and artificial aging on the fracture resistance of different cantilever zirconia fixed dental prostheses. J Adhes Dent 2012; 14: 161-166.
15. 15) Taira Y, Fukuji J, Odatsu T, Kamada K, Sawase T. Flexural strength of the joint between glass-infiltrated alumina frames and the alumina-magnesia modifier. J Prosthodont Res 2010; 54: 119-122.10.1016/j.jpor.2010.01.002 ↗
16. 16) Shijo Y, Shinya A, Gomi H, Lassila LVJ, Vallittu PK, Shinya A. Studies on mechanical strength, thermal expansion of layering porcelains to alumina and zirconia ceramic core materials. Dent Mater J 2009; 28: 352-361.10.4012/dmj.28.352 ↗
17. 17) Oh JW, Song KY, Ahn SG, Park JM, Lee MH, Seo JM. Effects of core characters and veneering technique on biaxial flexural strength in porcelain fused to metal and porcelain veneered zirconia. J Adv Prosthodont 2015; 7: 349-357.10.4047/jap.2015.7.5.349 ↗
18. 18) Nakamura K, Adolfsson E, Milleding P, Kanno T, Ortengren U. Influence of grain size and veneer firing process on the flexural strength of zirconia ceramics. Eur J Oral Sci 2012; 120: 249-254.10.1111/j.1600-0722.2012.00958.x ↗
19. 19) Passos SP, Linke B, Major PW, Nychka JA. The effect of air-abrasion and heat treatment on the fracture behavior of Y-TZP. Dent Mater 2015; 31: 1011-1021.10.1016/j.dental.2015.05.008 ↗
20. 20) Fraga S, Valandro LF, Bottino MA, May LG. Hard machining, glaze firing and hydrofluoric acid etching. Do these procedures affect the flexural strength of a leucite glass-ceramic? Dent Mater 2015; 31: 131-140.10.1016/j.dental.2015.04.005 ↗
21. 21) Hjerppe J, Narhi T, Fröberg K, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Effect of shading the zirconia framework on biaxial strength and surface microhardness. Acta Odontol Scand 2008; 66: 262-267.10.1080/00016350802247123 ↗
22. 22) Sundh A, Sjögren G. A comparison of fracture strength of yttrium-oxide-partially-stabilized zirconia ceramic crowns with varying core thickness, shapes and veneer ceramics. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 682-688.10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01284.x ↗
23. 23) Wang RR, Lu CL, Wang G, Zhang DS. Influence of cyclic loading on the fracture toughness and load bearing capacities of all-ceramic crowns. Int J Oral Sci 2014; 6: 99-104.10.1038/ijos.2013.94 ↗
24. 24) Fleming GJP, Narayan O. The effect of cement type and mixing on the bi-axial fracture strength of cemented aluminous core porcelain discs. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 69-76.10.1016/S0109-5641(02)00006-4 ↗
25. 25) Xiaoping L, Dongfeng R, Silikas N. Effect of etching time and resin bond on the flexural strength of IPS e.max Press glass ceramic. Dent Mater 2014; 30: 330-336.10.1016/j.dental.2014.08.373 ↗
26. 26) Tang X, Luo H, Bai Y, Tang H, Nakamura T, Yatani H. Influences of multiple firings and aging on surface roughness, strength and hardness of veneering ceramics for zirconia frameworks. J Dent 2015; 43: 1148-1153.10.1016/j.jdent.2015.06.006 ↗
27. 27) Cotes C, Arata A, Melo RM, Bottino MA, Machado JP, Souzo RO. Effects of aging procedures on the topographic surface, structural stability, and mechanical strength of a ZrO2-based dental ceramic. Dent Mater 2014; 30: 396-404.10.1016/j.dental.2014.08.380 ↗
28. 28) Siarampi E, Kontonasaki E, Andrikopoulos KS, Kantiranis N, Voyiatzis GA, Zorba T, Paraskevopoulos KM, Koidis P. Effect of in vitro aging on the flexural strength and probability to fracture of Y-TZP zirconia ceramics for all-ceramic restorations. Dent Mater 2014; 30: 306-316.10.1016/j.dental.2014.05.033 ↗
29. 29) Isgro G, Pallav P, van der Zel JM, Feilzer AJ. The influence of the veneering porcelain and different surface treatments on the biaxial flexural strength of a heat-pressed ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 90: 465-473.10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.08.003 ↗
30. 30) Ban S, Anusavice KJ. Influence of test method on failure stressof brittle dental material. J Dent Res 1990; 69: 1791-1799.10.1177/00220345900690120201 ↗
31. 31) Yilmaz H, Aydin C, Gul BE. Flexural strength and fracture toughness of dental core ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98: 120-128.10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60045-6 ↗
32. 32) Huang CW, Hsueh CH. Piston-on-three-ball versus pistonon-ring in evaluating the biaxial strength of dental ceramics. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 117-123.10.1016/j.dental.2011.02.011 ↗
33. 33) Pagniano RP, Seghi RR, Rosenstiel SF, Wang RT, Katsube N. The effect of a layer of resin luting agent on the biaxial flexure strength of two all-ceramic systems. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93: 456-466.10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.02.012 ↗
34. 34) Sundh A, Molin M, Sjögren G. Fracture resistance of yttrium-oxide-partially-stabilized zirconia all-ceramic bridges after veneering and mechanical fatique testing. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 476-482.10.1016/j.dental.2004.07.013 ↗
35. 35) Schulzea K, Marshall S, Ganskyb S, Marshall G. Color stability and hardness in dental composites after accelerated aging. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 612-619.10.1016/S0109-5641(03)00003-4 ↗
36. 36) Beuer F, Steff B, Naumann M, Sorensen JA. Load-bearing capacity of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partia denture with different computer aided design (CAD) / computer aided manufacturing (CAM) fabricated framework materials. Eur J Oral Sci 2008; 116: 381-386.10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00551.x ↗
37. 37) ISO-standards ISO 6872 Dental Ceramic. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization; 1998.
38. 38) Chen YM, Smales RJ, Yip HK, Sung WJ. Translucency and biaxial flexural strength of four ceramic core materials. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 1506-1511.10.1016/j.dental.2008.03.010 ↗
39. 39) Wakabayashi N, Anusavice KJ. Crack initiation modes in bilayered alumina/porcelain discs as a function of core/veneer thickness ratio and supporting substrate stiffness. J Dent Res 2000; 79: 1398-1404.10.1177/00220345000790060801 ↗
40. 40) Thompson JY, Anusavice KJ, Naman A, Morris HF. Fracture surface characterization of clinically failed all-ceramic crowns. J Dent Res 1994; 73: 1824-1832.10.1177/00220345940730120601 ↗
41. 41) Heffernan MJ, Aquilino SA, Diaz-Arnold AM. Relative translucency of six all ceramic systems. Part I: Core materials. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 4-9.10.1067/mpr.2002.126794 ↗
42. 42) Dikicier S, Ayyildiz S, Ozen J, Sipahi C. Effect of varying core thicknesses and artificial aging on the color difference of different all-ceramic materials. Acta Odontol Scand 2014; 72: 623-629.10.3109/00016357.2013.879997 ↗
43. 43) Pires-de-Souza FC, Casemiro LA, Garcia LF, Cruvinel DR. Color stability of dental ceramics submitted to artificial accelerated aging after repeated firings. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 101: 13-18.10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60282-6 ↗
44. 44) Heydecke G, Zhang F, Razzoog ME. In vitro color stability of double-layer veneers after accelerated aging. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 551-557.10.1067/mpr.2001.115385 ↗
45. 45) Flinn BD, de Groot DA, Mancl LA, Raigrodski AJ. Accelerated aging characteristics of three yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline dental materials. J Prosthet Dent 2012; 108: 223-230.10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60166-8 ↗
46. 46) Fischer J, Stawarczyk B, Hammerle CHF. Flexural strength of veneering ceramics for zirconia. J Dent 2008; 36: 316-321.10.1016/j.jdent.2008.01.017 ↗