Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Fracture resistance of direct inlay-retained adhesive bridges: effect of pontic material and occlusal morphology


Özcan, Mutlu; Breuklander, Marijn; Salihoğlu-Yener, Esra (2012). Fracture resistance of direct inlay-retained adhesive bridges: effect of pontic material and occlusal morphology. Dental Materials Journal, 31(4):514-522.

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of a) pontic materials and b) occlusal morphologies on the fracture resistance of fi ber-reinforced composite (FRC) inlay-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDP). Inlay-retained FRC FPDs (N=45, n=9) were constructed using a) resin composite (deep anatomy), b) natural tooth, c) acrylic denture tooth, d) porcelain denture tooth and e) resin composite (shallow anatomy), as pontic materials. In addition resin composite beams were fabricated (N=30, n=10): i) 'circular', ii) 'elliptic I', and iii) 'elliptic II'. There was no significant difference between the fracture resistance of Groups a, b, c, and d (598, 543, 539, 509 N, respectively) (p>0.05) (One-way ANOVA). Fracture resistance of Group e (1,186 N) was significantly higher than those of other groups (p<0.05) (Tukey's test). No significant difference was found between Group i (1,750 N) and Group ii (1,790 N). Not the pontic material but the occlusal morphology affects the fracture resistance of FRC FDPs.

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of a) pontic materials and b) occlusal morphologies on the fracture resistance of fi ber-reinforced composite (FRC) inlay-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDP). Inlay-retained FRC FPDs (N=45, n=9) were constructed using a) resin composite (deep anatomy), b) natural tooth, c) acrylic denture tooth, d) porcelain denture tooth and e) resin composite (shallow anatomy), as pontic materials. In addition resin composite beams were fabricated (N=30, n=10): i) 'circular', ii) 'elliptic I', and iii) 'elliptic II'. There was no significant difference between the fracture resistance of Groups a, b, c, and d (598, 543, 539, 509 N, respectively) (p>0.05) (One-way ANOVA). Fracture resistance of Group e (1,186 N) was significantly higher than those of other groups (p<0.05) (Tukey's test). No significant difference was found between Group i (1,750 N) and Group ii (1,790 N). Not the pontic material but the occlusal morphology affects the fracture resistance of FRC FDPs.

Statistics

Citations

3 citations in Web of Science®
3 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

2 downloads since deposited on 07 Mar 2013
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2012
Deposited On:07 Mar 2013 12:38
Last Modified:07 Dec 2017 20:24
Publisher:Japanese Society for Dental Materials and Devices
ISSN:0287-4547
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2012-019
PubMed ID:22864202

Download