Different Cavity Designs with Additional Wings Increase the Fracture Resistance of Inlay-Retained Monolithic Zirconia Fixed Dental Prostheses

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorKececi, Murat
dc.contributor.authorBuyukerkmen, Emine Begum
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-23T14:26:42Z
dc.date.available2024-02-23T14:26:42Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.departmentNEÜen_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate the effect of different cavity designs and cement types on the fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia inlay-retained fixed dental prostheses (IRFDPs). Materials and Methods: Four study models consisting of a second premolar, a missing first molar, and a second molar were used for the different cavity designs. Four different inlay cavity designs were prepared: DO-MO (disto-occlusal-mesio-occlusal cavity), MOD-MOD (mesio-occlusodistal-mesio-occlusodistal cavity), WDO-WMO (DO-MO with additional wings), and WMOD-WMOD (MOD-MOD with additional wings). A total of 64 epoxy resin models were produced and scanned individually. IRFDPs were then fabricated from monolithic zirconia using CAD/ CAM software. The bonding surface of the IRFDPs was airborne particle abraded (50-mu m alumina/2 MPa), then cemented onto the epoxy resin models using two cementation protocols (n = 8 per group): (1) P = cemented with Panavia SA Cement Plus Automix; and (2) Z/C = cemented with MDP-containing primer (Z-Prime Plus) combined with Calibra Universal resin cement. All IRFDPs were fatigued through thermal aging (6,000 cycles/5 & DEG;C to 55 & DEG;C) and chewing simulations (600,000 cycles x 50-N load, 2.1 Hz). All IRFDPs were then subjected to a fracture resistance test using a universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 0.2 mm/minute. Data were statistically analyzed using one-and two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni multiple comparisons test (P = .001). Results: The mean fracture load (N) of the designs were as follows: WMOD-WMOD = 1,111.1; WDO-WMO = 1,057.4; MOD-MOD = 725.6; DO-MO = 682.7. According to two-way ANOVA, the differences among the cavity designs were statistically significant (P < .05). Conclusion: The cavity design of IRFDPs affected the fracture resistance. However, the fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia IRFDPs with any cavity design was enough to withstand expected posterior chewing forces.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipScientific Research Comity, University of Necmettin Erbakan [201424001]en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors certify that they have no commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest in connection with the manuscript. This study was supported by Scientific Research Comity, University of Necmettin Erbakan, project no: 201424001.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.11607/ijp.8010
dc.identifier.endpage493en_US
dc.identifier.issn0893-2174
dc.identifier.issn1942-4426
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.pmid36125873en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85138188034en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage487en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.8010
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12452/14300
dc.identifier.volume35en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000864437300016en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherQuintessence Publishing Co Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal Of Prosthodonticsen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subject[Keyword Not Available]en_US
dc.titleDifferent Cavity Designs with Additional Wings Increase the Fracture Resistance of Inlay-Retained Monolithic Zirconia Fixed Dental Prosthesesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu