Article

Residual stresses in bilayer dental ceramics.

Department of Dental Biomaterials, College of Dentistry, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Biomaterials (Impact Factor: 8.31). 07/2005; 26(16):3235-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.08.025
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It is clinically observed that lithia-disilicate-based all-ceramic fixed partial dentures (FPD) can fail because of the fragmentation of the veneering material. The hypothesis of this study is that the global residual stresses within the surface of those veneered FPDs may be responsible for partial fragmentation of the veneering ceramic. Bilayer and monolithic ceramic composites were prepared using a lithia disilicate based (Li2OSiO2) glass-ceramic core and a glass veneer. A four-step fracture mechanics approach was used to analyze residual stress in bilayered all-ceramic FPDs. We found a statistically significant increase in the mean flexural strengths of bilayer specimens compared with monolithic glass specimens (p < or = 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference between the mean longitudinal and transverse indentation-induced crack sizes in bilayer specimens (p < or = 0.05), which indicates the existence of residual stress. Global residual stresses in the veneer layer, calculated using a fracture mechanics equation, were determined to be responsible for the increased strength and observed chipping, i.e., spallation in bilayer ceramic composites.

1 Follower
 · 
104 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recently all-ceramic restorative systems have been introduced that use CAD/CAM technology to fabricate both the Y-TZP core and veneer-ceramic layers. The aim was to identify whether the CAD/CAM approach resulted in more favourable stressing patterns in the veneer-ceramic when compared with a conventionally sintered Y-TZP core/veneer-ceramic.
    Journal of Dentistry 08/2014; 42(10). DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.08.001 · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: "Residual stress" can be developed during polymerization of the dental composite and it can be remained after this process was completed. The total amount of the force which applied to the composite restoration can be calculated by the sum of external and internal force. For the complete understanding of the restoration failure behavior. these two factors should be considered. In this experiment. I compared the residual stress of the recently developed nanofilled dental composite by ring slitting methods. The composites used in this study can be categorized in two groups. one is microhybrid type-Z250, as control group, and nanofilled type-Grandio, Filtek Supreme. Ceram-X, as experimental ones. Composite ring was made and marked two reference points on the surface. Then measure the change of the distance between these two points before and after ring slitting. From the distance change, average circumferential residual stress was calculated. In 10 minutes and 1 hour measurement groups, Filtek Supreme showed higher residual stress than Z250 and Ceram-X. In 24 hour group, Filtek showed higher stress than the other groups. Following the result of this experiment, nanofilled composite showed similar or higher residual stress than Z250, and when comparing the Z250 and Filtek Supreme, which have quite similar matrix components. Filtek Supreme groups showed higher residual stress.
    01/2008; 33(5). DOI:10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.5.457
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE To investigate the microtensile bond strength between two all-ceramic systems; lithium disilicate glass ceramic and zirconia core ceramics bonded with their corresponding glass veneers. MATERIALS AND METHODS Blocks of core ceramics (IPS e.max® Press and Lava™ Frame) were fabricated and veneered with their corresponding glass veneers. The bilayered blocks were cut into microbars; 8 mm in length and 1 mm2 in cross-sectional area (n = 30/group). Additionally, monolithic microbars of these two veneers (IPS e.max® Ceram and Lava™ Ceram; n = 30/group) were also prepared. The obtained microbars were tested in tension until fracture, and the fracture surfaces of the microbars were examined with fluorescent black light and scanning electron microscope (SEM) to identify the mode of failure. One-way ANOVA and the Dunnett's T3 test were performed to determine significant differences of the mean microtensile bond strength at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS The mean microtensile bond strength of IPS e.max® Press/IPS e.max® Ceram (43.40 ± 5.51 MPa) was significantly greater than that of Lava™ Frame/Lava™ Ceram (31.71 ± 7.03 MPa)(P<.001). Fluorescent black light and SEM analysis showed that most of the tested microbars failed cohesively in the veneer layer. Furthermore, the bond strength of Lava™ Frame/Lava™ Ceram was comparable to the tensile strength of monolithic glass veneer of Lava™ Ceram, while the bond strength of bilayered IPS e.max® Press/IPS e.max® Ceram was significantly greater than tensile strength of monolithic IPS e.max® Ceram. CONCLUSION Because fracture site occurred mostly in the glass veneer and most failures were away from the interfacial zone, microtensile bond test may not be a suitable test for bonding integrity. Fracture mechanics approach such as fracture toughness of the interface may be more appropriate to represent the bonding quality between two materials.
    The journal of advanced prosthodontics 06/2014; 6(3):151-6. DOI:10.4047/jap.2014.6.3.151 · 0.63 Impact Factor