To evaluate the clinical performance of partial glass-ceramic (IPS e.max Press) posterior restorations. A total of 765 restorations in 158 patients were placed between 2008 and 2018 and evaluated in a prospective study during regular dental care visits between 2015 and 2018. The restorations were luted with a conventional photo-polymerized resin composite (HFO) in conjunction with an Immediate Dentin Sealing procedure (IDS). Intra-oral photographs and radiographs were made and evaluated using USPHS criteria. The mean observation time was 53.3 months (range 3–113 months). Three absolute failures occurred (tooth fractures, n = 2; apical re-infection, n = 1) all leading to the loss of the restored tooth. Repairable and salvageable failures occurred in 9 teeth (endodontic complications, n = 7; secondary caries, n = 1; debonding, n = 1). The survival and success rates according to Kaplan-Meier after 5 years cumulated to 99.6% and 98.6%, respectively. Location (premolar/molar and mandibula/maxilla), pre-restorative endodontic status (vital/devitalised) and extension of the indirect ceramic restoration (number of sides and cusps involved) did not significantly affect the cumulative success rate (log rank test, p > 0.05). The condition of the vast majority of the restorations remained unaffected for 5 years. Partial glass-ceramic posterior restorations (pressed lithium disilicate (IPS e.max press, Ivoclar Vivadent) luted by means of a conventional photo-polymerized resin composite in conjunction with the use of an IDS procedure have an excellent medium-term prognosis. Partial glass-ceramic posterior restorations can be considered as a highly reliable treatment option. Location and extension of the restoration and pre-restorative endodontic status do not affect success rate.

/pdf/prospective-clinical-evaluation-of-765-partial-glass-ceramic-457inhyc8z.pdf

Prospective clinical evaluation of 765 partial glass-ceramic posterior restorations luted using photo-polymerized resin composite in conjunction with immediate dentin sealing

Aim and objective To evaluate the effect of cervical margin relocation (CMR) for crowns designed using CAD/CAM technology and fabricated from lithium disilicate (e.max, CAD) before and after aging; and to compare the fracture forces and failure type of the tested crowns. Materials and methods Mesio-occluso-distal(MOD) cavities 1 mm above the cementoenamel junction(CEJ) were prepared on 40 maxillary first premolars. The teeth were divided into four groups. In group A, all cervical margins (CM) were located 1 mm above the CEJ. However, in both mesial and distal proximal boxes of groups B, C, and D, in addition to the MOD cavities, the CMs were extended 2 mm on both sides below the CEJ apically to simulate the CMR technique. In group B, the mesial and distal proximal boxes were filled with flowable composite, while for group C and group D, specimens were filled with composite resin fillings. To simulate the CMR technique, the cavities were filled with composite layers of 3 mm in two increments. Using the CAD/CAM system, 40 standard crowns were prepared on premolars, then cemented using a dual-curing adhesive cement. Assessments of the marginal integrity of interfaces of the proximal boxes of the cemented crowned teeth were recorded. Statistical differences between groups were analyzed using the ANOVA and Bonferroni's posthoc test. Results The first null hypothesis was accepted since no statistically significant differences were found in marginal integrity before and after aging (p>0.05), while the second was partially rejected since different fractured force values were recorded and a significant difference was detected between group D and group B. The third hypothesis was rejected because the catastrophic fracture rate was the highest among the four groups. Conclusion The implementation of CMR before and after aging had a good effect on the marginal integrity of CM relocation. The CMR technique with resin luting cement of lithium disilicate crowns is effective and recommended for the restoration in deep proximal boxes of premolars or posterior teeth. Clinical significance CAD/CAM-generated e. max all-ceramic crowns with composite as the CMR enable the reconstruction of severely destroyed teeth irrespective of the position of the cavity margins.

/pdf/effects-of-the-cervical-marginal-relocation-technique-on-the-y5s34tp1dz.pdf

Effects of the Cervical Marginal Relocation Technique on the Marginal Adaptation of Lithium Disilicate CAD/CAM Ceramic Crowns on Premolars.

OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the effect of simulated endodontic access preparation on the failure loads of lithium disilicate crowns and resin-matrix ceramic (RMC) crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Eighty maxillary first premolar crowns were manufactured by using four different CAD/CAM blocks (n = 20): lithium disilicate (LD; IPS e.max CAD), resin nanoceramic (RNC; Lava Ultimate), flexible nanaoceramic (FNC; GC Cerasmart), and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (PIC; VITA Enamic). Half of each group was accessed and repaired to simulate endodontic treatment. After cyclic loading, all specimens were loaded to failure. Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey-HSD test (α = .05).
RESULTS
The load to failure results showed significant differences for material types (P < .001), but not for endodontic access simulation (P = .09). The highest and lowest mean failure loads were obtained for LD (1546 N) and PIC (843 N), respectively.
CONCLUSION
The endodontic access preparation was not found to affect the fracture strength of LD and RMC crowns. The LD showed higher fracture strength than RMC crowns. Even though significant differences were noted for failure loads regarding different crown materials, all could reasonably withstand masticatory forces.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
The endodontic access preparation through a restoration is known to be a common challenge in clinical practice. Maintaining a repaired LD or RMC crown is feasible and replacement may not be necessary.

/pdf/effect-of-endodontic-access-simulation-on-the-fracture-lig2t2z7yl.pdf

Effect of endodontic access simulation on the fracture strength of lithium-disilicate and resin-matrix ceramic CAD-CAM crowns.

This study aimed to compare the occlusal morphology and fracture behavior of lithium disilicate ceramic dental crowns on 12 human participants' premolar #45 designed by a knowledge-based AI (CEREC, biogeneric individual function, BI) and different human personnel (experienced technician, TD, and trained dental students, AD) using CAD software. Digital datasets of crown design were best-fit aligned with the original teeth to evaluate profile and volume discrepancies of the occlusal morphology, and difference in the functional cuspal angle. Milled and sintered lithium disilicate crowns were resin-luted to 3D-printed dental casts and were subjected to axial load-to-fracture test. The fracture loads and failure modes were recorded and examined. Repeated measures ANOVA with LSD post-hoc test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, paired t-test, and chi-square exact test were used for statistical analyses (α = 0.05). BI-generated crowns showed the highest occlusal profile discrepancy (0.3677 ± 0.0388 mm), whereas human-CAD designed crowns showed higher conformity to the original teeth (0.3254 ± 0.0515 mm for TD, 0.3571 ± 0.0820 for AD; z-difference method; p < 0.001). Cusp angle values were significantly different in all groups except BI and TD (54.76 ± 3.81° for the original teeth, 70.84 ± 4.31° for BI, 67.45 ± 5.30° for TD, and 62.30 ± 7.92° for AD; p < 0.001). Although all three groups of crown designs could achieve clinically acceptable fracture resistance (1556.09 ± 525.68 N for BI, 1486.00 ± 520.08 N for TD, 1425.77 ± 433.34 for AD; p = 0.505) such that no significant difference in fracture strength was found, most crowns presented catastrophic bulk fracture that was not clinically restorable because of the substrate fracture. Group BI had a significantly higher percentage of restorable substrate damage than TD (p = 0.014) and AD (p < 0.001). In conclusion, in designing lithium disilicate dental crown, CAD design with human may be better than knowledge-based AI. 

Morphology and fracture behavior of lithium disilicate dental crowns designed by human and knowledge-based AI.

The aim of this study was to determine the resistance to fracture of feldspathic restorations with lithium disilicate and crystallized with different ovens and programs. Methods: Sixty monolithic restorations (LD) (EMAX CAD™ LT, Ivoclar-Vivadent™) were designed with the same parameters and milled with a CAD/CAM system (CEREC SW 5.1, CEREC MCXL, Dentsply-Sirona™, Bensheim). Each restoration was randomly assigned by randomization software (RANDNUM) to one of the three groups: (a) (NF) Oven P310 (Ivoclar, Vivadent) normal crystallization program, (b) (FF) Ivoclar P310 oven (Ivoclar-Vivadent™) rapid crystallization program, or (c) (SF) SpeedFire oven (Dentsply-Sirona™). Results: There were statistically significant differences between the groups (ANOVA, p < 0.05). The NF and FF groups showed the highest values of resistance to fracture, with statistically significant differences with the SF group. Conclusions: Using a furnace from the same dental company with predetermined programs from the material manufacturer, as well as using a predetermined program for rapid crystallization, has no effect on fracture resistance, and would save clinical time when performing ceramic restorations with lithium disilicate, while keeping their mechanical properties.

https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/12/3215/pdf

Resistance to Fracture of Lithium Disilicate Feldspathic Restorations Manufactured Using a CAD/CAM System and Crystallized with Different Thermal Units and Programs

Purpose To investigate the influence of abutment material properties on the fracture resistance and failure mode of lithium disilicate (IPS e.max) CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/manufacturing) crowns on traditionally and minimally prepared simulated tooth substrates. Materials and methods Thirty lithium disilicate (IPS e.max) CAD/CAM crowns were divided into three groups (n = 10): TD: traditional thickness crowns cemented on Paradigm MZ100 abutments; MD: minimal thickness crowns cemented on Paradigm MZ100 abutments; ME: minimal thickness crowns cemented on e.max abutments. The 3Shape system was used to scan, design and mill all abutments and crowns with a die space set to 40 µm. Traditional thickness crowns were designed based on manufacturer guidelines with 1.5 mm occlusal thickness and 1.0 mm margins. Minimal thickness crowns were designed with 0.7 mm occlusal thickness and 0.5 mm margins. MZ100 composite and e.max abutments were selected to simulate dentin and enamel substrates, respectively, based on their elastic-modulus. Variolink Esthetic was used to cement all samples following manufacturer's instructions. A universal testing machine was used to load all specimens to fracture with a 3 mm radius stainless steel hemispherical tip at a crosshead speed 0.5 mm/minute along the longitudinal axis of the abutment with a 1 mm thermoplastic film placed between the loading tip and crown surface. Data was analyzed using ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc assessment. Fractographic analysis was performed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results The mean fracture load (standard deviation) was 1499 (241) N for TD; 1228 (287) N for MD; and 1377 (96) N for ME. Statistically significant difference between groups did not exist (p = 0.157, F = 1.995). In groups TD and MD with low e-modulus abutments, the dispersion of a probability distribution (coefficient of variation: CV) was statistically higher than that of group ME with high e-modulus abutments. SEM illustrated larger micro-fracture dimensions in Group MD than Group ME. Conclusion Minimal thickness e.max crowns did not demonstrate statistical difference in fracture resistance from traditional thickness crowns. Fracture mechanisms of minimal thickness e.max crowns may be affected by the e-modulus of the substrate. Minimal thickness e.max crowns may be a viable restorative option when supported by high e-modulus materials.

Sara Elizabeth Chen

Papers

Fracture Resistance of Various Thickness e.max CAD Lithium Disilicate Crowns Cemented on Different Supporting Substrates: An In Vitro Study