Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Feb;83(2):171-80.
doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)80009-8.

Fracture load and mode of failure of ceramic veneers with different preparations

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Fracture load and mode of failure of ceramic veneers with different preparations

J Castelnuovo et al. J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Feb.

Abstract

Statement of problem: Fracture is a clinical failure modality for ceramic veneers. Whether design of tooth preparation can affect the strength of ceramic veneers remains controversial.

Purpose: This in vitro study evaluated fracture load and mode of failure of ceramic veneers, with 4 tooth preparation designs, that were bonded on extracted human maxillary central incisors. Identical parameters were also measured on unrestored intact teeth for comparison.

Material and methods: Fifty maxillary central incisors were randomly divided into 5 equal groups. Each group was assigned a different tooth preparation design: (1) no incisal reduction, (2) 2 mm incisal reduction without palatal chamfer (butt joint), (3) 1 mm incisal reduction and 1 mm height palatal chamfer, (4) 4 mm incisal reduction and 1 mm height palatal chamfer, and (5) unrestored (control). Forty teeth were prepared to accommodate ceramic veneers of equal thickness and incisocervical length. Stone dies were fabricated and veneers made from IPS Empress ceramic. Ceramic veneers were bonded and all teeth mounted in phenolic rings with epoxy resin. Fracture loads were recorded with a mechanical testing machine.

Results: Mean fracture loads (SD) in kgf were as follows: group 1, 23.7 (6.11); group 2, 27.4 (9.63); group 3, 16.4 (3.44); group 4, 19.2 (6.18); and group 5, 31.0 (10.38). Modes of failure were also analyzed for both ceramic veneers and teeth. One-way ANOVA with multiple comparisons revealed 3 significant subsets: groups 1-2-5, groups 4-1, and groups 3-4 (P <.05). Groups 1 and 2 had no ceramic veneer fractures; group 3 had 3 ceramic veneer fractures, and group 4 had 6 ceramic veneer fractures.

Conclusion: Groups 1 and 2 recorded the greatest fracture loads that were comparable to an unrestored control.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources