OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the biaxial flexural strength of three core ceramic materials.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three groups of 10 disc-shaped specimens (16 mm diameter x 1.2 mm thickness - in accordance with ISO-6872, 1995) were made from the following ceramic materials: Turkom-Cera Fused Alumina [(Turkom-Ceramic (M) Sdn Bhd, Puchong, Selangor, Malaysia)], In-Ceram (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany) and Vitadur-N (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany), which were sintered according to the manufacturer's recommendations. The specimens were subjected to biaxial flexural strength test in an universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The definitive fracture load was recorded for each specimen and the biaxial flexural strength was calculated from an equation in accordance with ISO-6872.
RESULTS: The mean biaxial flexural strength values were: Turkom-Cera: 506.8 ± 87.01 MPa, In-Ceram: 347.4 ± 28.83 MPa and Vitadur-N: 128.7 ± 12.72 MPa. The results were analyzed by the Levene's test and Dunnett's T3 post-hoc test (SPSS software V11.5.0 for Windows, SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA ) at a preset significance level of 5% because of unequal group variances (P<0.001). There was statistically significant difference between the three core ceramics (P<0.05). Turkom-Cera showed the highest biaxial flexural strength, followed by In-Ceram and Vitadur-N.
CONCLUSIONS: Turkom-Cera core had significantly higher flexural strength than In-Ceram and Vitadur-N ceramic core materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixmaster dies were duplicated from the prepared maxillary first premolar tooth using nonprecious metal alloy (Wiron 99). Ten copings of 0.6 mm thickness were fabricated from each type of ceramic, for a total of thirty copings. Two master dies were used for each group, and each of them was used to lute five copings. All groups were cemented with resin luting cement Panavia F according to manufacturer's instructions and received a static load of 5 kg during cementation. After 24 hours of distilled water storage at 37 degrees C, the copings were vertically compressed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min.
RESULTS: The results of the present study showed the following mean loads at fracture: Turkom-Cera (2184 +/- 164 N), In-Ceram (2042 +/- 200 N), and Procera AllCeram (1954 +/- 211 N). ANOVA and Scheffe's post hoc test showed that the mean load at fracture of Turkom-Cera was significantly different from Procera AllCeram (p < 0.05). Scheffe's post hoc test showed no significant difference between the mean load at fracture of Turkom-Cera and In-Ceram or between the mean load at fracture of In-Ceram and Procera AllCeram.
CONCLUSION: Because Turkom-Cera demonstrated equal to or higher loads at fracture than currently accepted all-ceramic materials, it would seem to be acceptable for fabrication of anterior and posterior ceramic crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty Turkom-Cera ceramic disks (10 mm × 3 mm) were prepared and randomly divided into four groups. The disks were wet ground to 1000-grit and subjected to four surface treatments: (1) No treatment (Control), (2) sandblasting, (3) silane application, and (4) sandblasting + silane. The four groups of 10 specimens each were bonded with Panavia-F resin cement according to manufacturer's recommendations. The SBS was determined using the universal testing machine (Instron) at 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed. Failure modes were recorded and a qualitative micromorphologic examination of different surface treatments was performed. The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) tests.
RESULTS: The SBS of the control, sandblasting, silane, and sandblasting + silane groups were: 10.8 ± 1.5, 16.4 ± 3.4, 16.2 ± 2.5, and 19.1 ± 2.4 MPa respectively. According to the Tukey HSD test, only the mean SBS of the control group was significantly different from the other three groups. There was no significant difference between sandblasting, silane, and sandblasting + silane groups.
CONCLUSION: In this study, the three surface treatments used improved the bond strength of resin cement to Turkom-Cera disks.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The surface treatments used in this study appeared to be suitable methods for the cementation of glass infiltrated all-ceramic restorations.