Effect of preparation design and endodontic access on fracture resistance of zirconia overlays in mandibular molars: An in vitro study.

Jurado, Carlos A; Afrashtehfar, Kelvin I; Robles, Manuel; Alaqeely, Razan S; Alsayed, Hussain D; Lindquist, Terry J; Alhotan, Abdulaziz (2024). Effect of preparation design and endodontic access on fracture resistance of zirconia overlays in mandibular molars: An in vitro study. (In Press). Journal of prosthodontics Wiley 10.1111/jopr.13865

[img]
Preview
Text
Journal_of_Prosthodontics_-_2024_-_Jurado_-_Effect_of_preparation_design_and_endodontic_access_on_fracture_resistance_of.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY).

Download (1MB) | Preview

PURPOSE

To evaluate the fracture resistance of zirconia overlays, considering various preparation designs and the presence of endodontic access.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety translucent zirconia (5Y-PSZ) overlay restorations were divided into six groups (n = 15/group) based on different preparation designs, with and without endodontic access: chamfer margin 4 mm above the gingival level without (group 1) and with endodontic access (group 2); margin 2 mm above the gingival level without (group 3) and with endodontic access (group 4); overlay with no chamfer margin without (group 5) and with endodontic access (group 6). Restorations were bonded to mandibular first molar resin dies, and the groups with endodontic access were sealed with flowable resin composite. All restorations underwent 100,000 cycles of thermal cycling between 5°C and 55°C, followed by loading until fracture. Maximum load and fracture resistance were recorded. ANOVA with Tukey post-hoc tests were used for statistical comparison (α < 0.05).

RESULTS

Fracture resistance significantly varied among overlay designs with and without endodontic access (p < 0.001), except for the no-margin overlays (groups 5 and 6). Overlays with a 2 mm margin above the gingival margin with endodontic access (group 4) exhibited significantly higher fracture resistance compared to both the 4-mm supragingival (group 2) and no-margin (group 6) designs, even when compared to their respective intact groups (groups 1 and 5). There were no significant differences between the no-margin and 4-mm supragingival overlays.

CONCLUSION

The more extensive zirconia overlay for mandibular molars is the first choice since the 2 mm margin above the gingival level design withstood considerable loads even after undergoing endodontic access. A no-margin overlay is preferred over the 4-mm supragingival design as it preserves more tooth structure and there was no outcome difference, irrespective of endodontic access. Caution is warranted in interpreting these findings due to the in vitro nature of the study.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology

UniBE Contributor:

Afrashtehfar, Kelvin Ian

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

1532-849X

Publisher:

Wiley

Language:

English

Submitter:

Pubmed Import

Date Deposited:

13 May 2024 08:11

Last Modified:

14 May 2024 07:19

Publisher DOI:

10.1111/jopr.13865

PubMed ID:

38734932

Uncontrolled Keywords:

dental prosthesis design dental restoration failure dental stress analysis endodontic access endodontically‐treated teeth finish line fracture resistance fracture toughness occlusal veneers zirconium oxide

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/196713

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/196713

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback