Influence of Digital Technologies and Framework Design on the Load to Fracture of Co-Cr Posterior Fixed Partial Denture Frameworks
- PMID: 34860426
- DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13458
Influence of Digital Technologies and Framework Design on the Load to Fracture of Co-Cr Posterior Fixed Partial Denture Frameworks
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the load to fracture of cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) 3-unit posterior fixed partial denture (FPD) frameworks manufactured by conventional and digital techniques and to evaluate the influence of the framework design on the fracture load.
Material and methods: Eighty 3-unit Co-Cr posterior FPD frameworks were fabricated with two designs: intermediate pontic (n = 40) and cantilever (n = 40). Each design was randomly divided into four groups (n = 10): casting, direct metal laser sintering, soft metal milling, and hard metal milling. After thermal cycling, all specimens were subjected to a 3-point bending test until fracture. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, Welch and Brown-Forsythe test, Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Welsch F and Tamhane T2 post hoc test, Student's t test, and Weibull statistics (α = 0.05).
Results: Significant differences (p < 0.001; F = 39.59) were found among intermediate pontic frameworks (except between laser sintering and hard metal milling), and cantilevered frameworks (F = 36.75) (except between laser sintering and hard metal milling, and casting and soft metal milling). The cantilever groups showed load to fracture values significantly lower than those of the intermediate pontic (p < 0.001; F = 28.29). The Weibull statistics corroborated the results.
Conclusions: Hard metal milling and laser sintered frameworks exhibited the highest load to fracture values. However, all tested frameworks demonstrated clinically acceptable load to fracture values. The framework design directly affected the fracture load, with drastically lower values in cantilevered frameworks.
Keywords: CAD-CAM technologies; base metal alloys; cantilever; fixed prostheses; fracture.
© 2021 by the American College of Prosthodontists.
References
-
- Ozcan M: Fracture reasons in ceramic-fused-to-metal restorations. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30:265-269
-
- Eliasson A, Arnelund CF, Johansson A: A clinical evaluation of cobalt-chromium metal-ceramic fixed partial dentures and crowns: a three- to seven-year retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent 2007;98:6-16
-
- Campos RE, Soares PV, Versluis A, et al: Crown fracture: failure load, stress distribution, and fractographic analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:447-455
-
- Rodríguez V, Tobar C, López-Suárez C, et al: Fracture load of metal, zirconia and polyetheretherketone posterior CAD-CAM milled fixed partial denture frameworks. Materials (Basel) 2021;14:959. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14040959
-
- Agustin-Panadero R, Fons-Font A, Roman-Rodriguez JL, et al: Zirconia versus metal: a preliminary comparative analysis of ceramic veneer behavior. Int J Prosthodont 2012;25:294-300
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous