In Vitro Fatigue and Fracture Testing of Temporary Materials from Different Manufacturing Processes in Implant-supported Anterior Crowns

Overview

Journal Clin Oral Investig

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2023 May 3

PMID 37133699

Authors

Laila Bein

Angelika Rauch

Michael Schmidt

Martin Rosentritt

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the in vitro fatigue and fracture force of temporary implant-supported anterior crowns made of different materials with different abutment total occlusal convergence (TOC), with/without a screw channel, and with different types of fabrication.

Materials And Methods: One hundred ninety-two implant-supported crowns were manufactured (4° or 8° TOC; with/without screw channel) form 6 materials (n = 8; 2 × additive, 3 × subtractive, 1 × automix; reference). Crowns were temporarily cemented, screw channels were closed (polytetrafluoroethylene, resin composite), and crowns were stored in water (37 °C; 10 days) before thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML). Fracture force was determined.

Statistics: Kolmogorov-Smirnov, ANOVA; Bonferroni; Kaplan-Meier; log-rank; α = 0.05.

Results: Failure during TCML varied between 0 failures and total failure. Mean survival was between 1.8 × 10 and 4.8 × 10 cycles. The highest impact on survival presented the material (η = 0.072, p < .001). Fracture forces varied between 265.7 and 628.6 N. The highest impact on force was found for the material (η = 0.084, p < .001).

Conclusion: Additively and subtractively manufactured crowns provided similar or higher survival rates and fracture forces compared to automix crowns. The choice of material is decisive for the survival and fracture force. The fabrication is not crucial. A smaller TOC led to higher fracture force. Manually inserted screw channels had negative effects on fatigue testing.

Clinical Relevance: The highest stability has been shown for crowns with a low TOC, which are manufactured additively and subtractively. In automix-fabricated crowns, manually inserted screw channels have negative effects.

Citing Articles

Clinical Factors on Dental Implant Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Manfredini M, Poli P, Giboli L, Beretta M, Maiorana C, Pellegrini M Dent J (Basel). 2024; 12(7).

PMID: 39056987 PMC: 11276356. DOI: 10.3390/dj12070200.

References

Albrektsson T, Donos N . Implant survival and complications. The Third EAO consensus conference 2012. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23 Suppl 6:63-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02557.x. View

Pjetursson B, Heimisdottir K . Dental implants - are they better than natural teeth?. Eur J Oral Sci. 2018; 126 Suppl 1:81-87. DOI: 10.1111/eos.12543. View

Burns D, Beck D, Nelson S . A review of selected dental literature on contemporary provisional fixed prosthodontic treatment: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 90(5):474-97. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(03)00259-2. View

Perry R, Magnuson B . Provisional materials: key components of interim fixed restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2012; 33(1):59-60, 62. View

Kerby R, Knobloch L, Sharples S, Peregrina A . Mechanical properties of urethane and bis-acryl interim resin materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 110(1):21-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60334-0. View

Hahnel S, Krifka S, Behr M, Kolbeck C, Lang R, Rosentritt M . Performance of resin materials for temporary fixed denture prostheses. J Oral Sci. 2019; 61(2):270-275. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.18-0150. View

Luthardt R, Stossel M, Hinz M, Vollandt R . Clinical performance and periodontal outcome of temporary crowns and fixed partial dentures: A randomized clinical trial. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83(1):32-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70086-2. View

Piplani A, Sajjan M, Ramaraju A, Tanwani T, Sushma G, Ganathipathi G . An in-vitro study to compare the temperature rise in the pulp chamber by direct method using three different provisional restorative materials. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016; 16(1):36-41. PMC: 4832802. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.161569. View

Kim S, Watts D . Polymerization shrinkage-strain kinetics of temporary crown and bridge materials. Dent Mater. 2003; 20(1):88-95. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(03)00101-5. View

10.

Balkenhol M, Knapp M, Ferger P, Heun U, Wostmann B . Correlation between polymerization shrinkage and marginal fit of temporary crowns. Dent Mater. 2008; 24(11):1575-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.07.001. View

11.

Alt V, Hannig M, Wostmann B, Balkenhol M . Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures: CAD/CAM versus directly fabricated restorations. Dent Mater. 2010; 27(4):339-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.11.012. View

12.

Peng C, Chung K, Yau H, Ramos Jr V . Assessment of the internal fit and marginal integrity of interim crowns made by different manufacturing methods. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 123(3):514-522. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.02.024. View

13.

Tahayeri A, Morgan M, Fugolin A, Bompolaki D, Athirasala A, Pfeifer C . 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials. Dent Mater. 2017; 34(2):192-200. PMC: 5801146. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2017.10.003. View

14.

Zimmermann M, Ender A, Egli G, Ozcan M, Mehl A . Fracture load of CAD/CAM-fabricated and 3D-printed composite crowns as a function of material thickness. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 23(6):2777-2784. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2717-2. View

15.

Lee W, Lee D, Lee K . Evaluation of internal fit of interim crown fabricated with CAD/CAM milling and 3D printing system. J Adv Prosthodont. 2017; 9(4):265-270. PMC: 5582092. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2017.9.4.265. View

16.

Kurbad A . CAD/CAM-based polymer provisionals as treatment adjuncts. Int J Comput Dent. 2014; 16(4):327-46. View

17.

Schnutenhaus S, Neveling U, Luthardt R . Digital implantological workflow for a CAD/CAM immediate long-term temporary restoration for the edentulous maxilla. Int J Comput Dent. 2018; 21(2):133-146. View

18.

Abdullah A, Pollington S, Liu Y . Comparison between direct chairside and digitally fabricated temporary crowns. Dent Mater J. 2018; 37(6):957-963. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2017-315. View

19.

Kessler A, Reymus M, Hickel R, Kunzelmann K . Three-body wear of 3D printed temporary materials. Dent Mater. 2019; 35(12):1805-1812. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2019.10.005. View

20.

Revilla-Leon M, Meyers M, Zandinejad A, Ozcan M . A review on chemical composition, mechanical properties, and manufacturing work flow of additively manufactured current polymers for interim dental restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018; 31(1):51-57. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12438. View