Fracture Resistance of Aluminium Oxide and Lithium Disilicate-based Crowns using Different Luting Cements: An in vitro Study

Abstract

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to investigate the fracture resistance of two types of ceramic crowns cemented with two different cements. Methods and Materials Forty premolar crowns were fabricated using lithium-disilicate (IPS Empress-2) and glass-infiltrated aluminium-oxide (In-Ceram) ceramic systems. The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10) with Group 1 (IPS Empress-2) and Group 2 (In-Ceram) cemented with glass ionomer cement. Group 3 (IPS Empress-2) and Group 4 (In-Ceram) were cemented with resin cement. Crowns were tested in a universal testing machine at a compressive-load speed of 10 mm/min. Fracture modes were grouped into five categories. One way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to detect statistical significances (p<0.05). Results The mean (SD) fracture resistance (Newtons) for Groups 1 to 4 were: 245.35 (82.69), 390.48 (67.03), 269.69 (10.33), and 418.36 (26.24). The cement type had no statistical significant effect (p>0.05) on fracture resistance within each ceramic system tested. In-Ceram crowns cemented with either glass ionomer or resin cements exhibited a statistically significantly higher fracture-resistance than IPS Empress-2 crowns (p<0.05). Minimal fracture in the test crowns was the common mode exhibited. Conclusion Fracture resistance of IPS Empress-2 and In-Ceram crowns was not affected by the type of cement used for luting. Clinical Significance Both In-Ceram and IPS Empress-2 crowns can be successfully luted with the cements tested with In-Ceram exhibiting higher fracture resistance than IPS Empress-2. Citation Al-Wahadni AM, Hussey DL, Grey N, Hatamleh MM. Fracture Resistance of Aluminium Oxide and Lithium Disilicate-based Crowns using Different Luting Cements: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009 March; (10)2:051-058.