Statement of problem
Two novel restorative materials, a polymer infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) and a resin nanoceramic (RNC), for computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD-CAM) applications have recently become commercially available. Little independent evidence regarding their mechanical properties exists to facilitate material selection.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the edge chipping resistance and flexural strength of the PICN and RNC materials and compare them with 2 commonly used feldspathic ceramic (FC) and leucite reinforced glass-ceramic (LRGC) CAD-CAM materials that share the same clinical indications.
Material and methods
PICN, RNC, FC, and LRGC material specimens were obtained by sectioning commercially available CAD-CAM blocks. Edge chipping test specimens (n=20/material) were adhesively attached to a resin substrate before testing. Edge chips were produced using a 120-degree, sharp, conical diamond indenter mounted on a universal testing machine and positioned 0.1 to 0.7 mm horizontally from the specimen’s edge. The chipping force was plotted against distance to the edge, and the data were fitted to linear and quadratic equations. One-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05) in edge chipping toughness. Beam specimens (n=22/material) were tested for determining flexural strength using a 3-point bend test. Weibull statistics determined intergroup differences (α=.05). Flexural modulus and work of fracture were also calculated, and 1-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05)
Significant (P<.05) differences were found among the 4 CAD-CAM materials for the 4 mechanical properties. Specifically, the material rankings were edge chipping toughness: RNC>LRGC=FC>PICN; flexural strength: RNC=LRGC>PICN>FC; flexural modulus: RNC<PICN<LRGC<FC; and work of fracture: RNC>LRGC=PICN>FC.
The RNC material demonstrated superior performance for the mechanical properties tested compared with the other 3 materials.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- The evolution of the CEREC system.J Am Dent Assoc. 2006; 137 Suppl: 7S-13S
- The use of CAD/CAM in dentistry.Dent Clin North Am. 2011; 55: 559-570
- A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience.Dent Mater J. 2009; 28: 44-56
- Materials for chairside CAD/CAM-produced restorations.J Am Dent Assoc. 2006; 137 Suppl: 14S-21S
- Chairside CAD/CAM: an overview of restorative material options.CompendContin Educ Dent. 2012; 33 (52-8): 50
- Emerging ceramic-based materials for dentistry.J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 1235-1242
- Resin-composite blocks for dental CAD/CAM applications.J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 1232-1234
- The clinical success of all-ceramic restorations.J Am Dent Assoc. 2008; 139 Suppl: 8S-13S
- Assessing restorative dental materials: I. Test methods and assessment of results.Dent Update. 2002; 29: 188-194
- A novel polymer infiltrated ceramic dental material.Dent Mater. 2011; 27: 527-534
- Fabrication and characterization of biomimetic ceramic/polymer composite materials for dental restoration.Dent Mater. 2013; 29: 375-381
- High-temperature-pressure polymerized resin-infiltrated ceramic networks.J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 62-67
- Survival of zirconia- and metal-supported fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review.Int J Prosthodont. 2010; 23: 493-502
- Ten-year outcome of three-unit fixed dental prostheses made from monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic.J Am Dent Assoc. 2012; 143: 234-240
- Brittleness index of machinable dental materials and its relation to the marginal chipping factor.J Dent. 2007; 35: 897-902
- How and when does fabrication damage adversely affect the clinical performance of ceramic restorations?.Dent Mater. 2013; 29: 85-96
- On edge chipping testing and some personal perspectives on the state of the art of mechanical testing.Dent Mater. 2015; 31: 26-36
- The slippery slope: critical perspectives on in vitro research methodologies.Dent Mater. 2012; 28: 41-51
- Which mechanical and physical testing methods are relevant for predicting the clinical performance of ceramic-based dental prostheses?.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18 Suppl 3: 218-231
- Perspectives on strength.Dent Mater. 1995; 11: 103-110
- Hertzian contact response and damage tolerance of dental ceramics.J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014; 34: 124-133
- Characterization of a polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network material.Dent Mater. 2014; 30: 564-569
- Fracture resistance and microleakage of endocrowns utilizing three CAD-CAM blocks.Oper Dent. 2015; 40: 201-210
- Fracture strength of CAD/CAM composite and composite-ceramic occlusal veneers.J Prosthodont Res. 2014; 58: 107-114
- Mechanical properties of resin-ceramic CAD/CAM restorative materials.J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 587-593
- Comparison of mechanical properties of three machinable ceramics with an experimental fluorophlogopite glass ceramic.J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 440-446
- Edge chipping and flexural resistance of monolithic ceramics.Dent Mater. 2013; 29: 1201-1208
- Chipping fracture resistance of dental CAD/CAM restorative materials: part I. Procedures and results.Dent Mater. 2014; 30: e99-e111
- Chipping fracture resistance of dental CAD/CAM restorative materials: part 2. Phenomenological model and the effect of indenter type.Dent Mater. 2014; 30: e112-e123
- The new Weibull handbook.5th ed. Dr Robert Abernethy, Publisher, 2006: 7-11
Published online: May 05, 2016
Supported by an American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics Stanley D. Tylman Research Grant.
Copyright © 2016 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.