VITA ENAMIC®, VITA Zahnfabrik
8,00
7,00
100,00
6,00 80,00
Vickers hardness GPa
Flexural modulus GPa
Determine the fracture toughness, flexural strength and modulus, and Vickers Hardness of a Resin Ceramic CAD/CAM material, CERASMART™, compared with commercially available materials.
The flexural strength and elastic modulus were measured using three-point-bending (ISO 6872:2008). Fracture toughness (KIc) of the materials tested was determined using the Single Edge V-Notch Beam (SEVNB) method in accordance with standard ISO 6872. Vickers micro hardness measures (three measurements for each sample).
120,00
60,00
40,00
20,00
CERASMART™
e-max
3,00
2,00
Vita Mark II
Vita Enamic
Lava Ultim
Cerasmart
Enamel
Dentin 0,00 e-max
Figure 4 Flexural modulus results
VITA ENAMIC®, VITA Zahnfabrik
Flexural strength and modulus results for polymer-infiltrated ceramic network were closely related to that of Dentin.
VITABLOCS Mark II, VITA Zahnfabrik e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent
Figure 2 Fracture toughness testing
Samples prepared at the lab were done using a diamond-disc-operating saw at slow speed and under constant irrigation (Isomed, Buehler Ltd, Lake Bluff, IL, USA).
Vita-Mark-II
Vita Enamic
Lava Ultim
Cerasmart
Enamel
Dentin
Figure 6 Vickers hardness results
polymer-infiltrated ceramic network material had lower Vickers hardness values.
4,00
Fractue toughness MPa·√m
3,50
250,00
Flexural strength MPa
200,00
150,00
100,00
Results demonstrated that all the materials properties were within the acceptable range for fabrication of single restorations according to the ISO standard for ceramics (ISO 6872:2008). However, important differences between the materials tested are noticed as a function of the resin component in their structure.
3,00
2,50
2,00
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00
e-Max
Vita-mark-II
Lava Ultim
Vita Enamic
Cerasmart
Enamel
Dentin
1.
Lauvahutanon S, Takahashi H, Shiozawa M, Iwasaki N, Asakawa Y, Oki M, Finger WJ, Arksornnukit M. Mechanical properties of composite resin blocks for CAD/CAM. Dent Mater J. 2014;33(5):705-10.
2.
ISO 6872: 2008. Dentistry — Ceramic materials, 3rd ed, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2008.
3.
An B, Wang R, Zhang D. Role of crystal arrangement on the mechanical performance of enamel. Acta Biomater. 2012 Oct;8(10):3784-93.
4.
Chun KJ, Lee JY. Comparative study of mechanical properties of dental restorative materials and dental hard tissues in compressive loads. J Dent Biomech. 2014 Oct 11;5
50,00
Figure 5 Fracture toughness results
Figure 1 Sample preparation
Mini-bar specimens (3.0 x 3.0x14mm) were prepared for each CAD-CAM material.
4,00
1,00
0,00
Lava™ Ultimate, 3M (Resin Ceramic)
5,00
0,00 e-max
Lava-Ultim
Vita-Enamic
CeraSmart
Vita Mark II
Enamel
Figure 3 Flexural strength results
Dentin
Fracture toughness results showed no significant differences between materials.
7,00
100,00
6,00 80,00
Vickers hardness GPa
Flexural modulus GPa
Determine the fracture toughness, flexural strength and modulus, and Vickers Hardness of a Resin Ceramic CAD/CAM material, CERASMART™, compared with commercially available materials.
The flexural strength and elastic modulus were measured using three-point-bending (ISO 6872:2008). Fracture toughness (KIc) of the materials tested was determined using the Single Edge V-Notch Beam (SEVNB) method in accordance with standard ISO 6872. Vickers micro hardness measures (three measurements for each sample).
120,00
60,00
40,00
20,00
CERASMART™
e-max
3,00
2,00
Vita Mark II
Vita Enamic
Lava Ultim
Cerasmart
Enamel
Dentin 0,00 e-max
Figure 4 Flexural modulus results
VITA ENAMIC®, VITA Zahnfabrik
Flexural strength and modulus results for polymer-infiltrated ceramic network were closely related to that of Dentin.
VITABLOCS Mark II, VITA Zahnfabrik e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent
Figure 2 Fracture toughness testing
Samples prepared at the lab were done using a diamond-disc-operating saw at slow speed and under constant irrigation (Isomed, Buehler Ltd, Lake Bluff, IL, USA).
Vita-Mark-II
Vita Enamic
Lava Ultim
Cerasmart
Enamel
Dentin
Figure 6 Vickers hardness results
polymer-infiltrated ceramic network material had lower Vickers hardness values.
4,00
Fractue toughness MPa·√m
3,50
250,00
Flexural strength MPa
200,00
150,00
100,00
Results demonstrated that all the materials properties were within the acceptable range for fabrication of single restorations according to the ISO standard for ceramics (ISO 6872:2008). However, important differences between the materials tested are noticed as a function of the resin component in their structure.
3,00
2,50
2,00
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00
e-Max
Vita-mark-II
Lava Ultim
Vita Enamic
Cerasmart
Enamel
Dentin
1.
Lauvahutanon S, Takahashi H, Shiozawa M, Iwasaki N, Asakawa Y, Oki M, Finger WJ, Arksornnukit M. Mechanical properties of composite resin blocks for CAD/CAM. Dent Mater J. 2014;33(5):705-10.
2.
ISO 6872: 2008. Dentistry — Ceramic materials, 3rd ed, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2008.
3.
An B, Wang R, Zhang D. Role of crystal arrangement on the mechanical performance of enamel. Acta Biomater. 2012 Oct;8(10):3784-93.
4.
Chun KJ, Lee JY. Comparative study of mechanical properties of dental restorative materials and dental hard tissues in compressive loads. J Dent Biomech. 2014 Oct 11;5
50,00
Figure 5 Fracture toughness results
Figure 1 Sample preparation
Mini-bar specimens (3.0 x 3.0x14mm) were prepared for each CAD-CAM material.
4,00
1,00
0,00
Lava™ Ultimate, 3M (Resin Ceramic)
5,00
0,00 e-max
Lava-Ultim
Vita-Enamic
CeraSmart
Vita Mark II
Enamel
Figure 3 Flexural strength results
Dentin
Fracture toughness results showed no significant differences between materials.
