Version 1
: Received: 15 September 2023 / Approved: 18 September 2023 / Online: 19 September 2023 (05:20:11 CEST)
How to cite:
Berar, A.M.; Dudescu, M.C.; Carbonel, M.; Bocanet, V.; Buduru, S.D. In-Vitro Comparative Study of Compressive Strength in CAD/CAM Dental Materials. Preprints2023, 2023091181. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1181.v1
Berar, A.M.; Dudescu, M.C.; Carbonel, M.; Bocanet, V.; Buduru, S.D. In-Vitro Comparative Study of Compressive Strength in CAD/CAM Dental Materials. Preprints 2023, 2023091181. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1181.v1
Berar, A.M.; Dudescu, M.C.; Carbonel, M.; Bocanet, V.; Buduru, S.D. In-Vitro Comparative Study of Compressive Strength in CAD/CAM Dental Materials. Preprints2023, 2023091181. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1181.v1
APA Style
Berar, A.M., Dudescu, M.C., Carbonel, M., Bocanet, V., & Buduru, S.D. (2023). In-Vitro Comparative Study of Compressive Strength in CAD/CAM Dental Materials. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1181.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Berar, A.M., Vlad Bocanet and Smaranda Dana Buduru. 2023 "In-Vitro Comparative Study of Compressive Strength in CAD/CAM Dental Materials" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1181.v1
Abstract
(1) Background: The study aimed to investigate compressive strength for three computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) dental materials: glassceramic IPS Empress CAD (IvoclarVivadent), hybrid ceramic Cerasmart (GC) and polymer-reinforced graphene G-CAM (Graphenano Dental). (2) Methods: 45 samples consisted of the molar crowns fabricated by three CAD/CAM materials were cemented adhesively on 3D printed abutments (Asiga DentalResin). The samples were divided into 3 groups (n=15) according to the crowns thickness; group 1 under the cusps/cervical margins - 0.6 mm/0.4 mm, group 2 - 1 mm/0.7 mm respectively, and group 3 - 1.5 mm/1 mm. Additionally, 20 cylindrical specimens fabricated by the three crowns and abutments material (n=5) were prepared by CAD/CAM technique. All samples and specimens were subjected to an axial compressive load by using a universal testing machine (Instron 3366-10kN, USA) until fracture. (3) Results: The compressive strength were for Empress CAD 1258 MPa, Cerasmart 501.3 MPa, G-CAM 435 MPa and Asiga resin 360 MPa. G-CAM crowns exhibited a higher maximum compressive load (1701.5-2011.8N) than both Cerasmart (1295.4-1642.9N) and Empress CAD (494.3-597.5N). (4) Conclusions: The CAD/CAM crown materials presented different mechanical behavior; Empress CAD and Cerasmart presented a fragile behavior, with a high compressive strength when compared to G-CAM and Asiga resins.
Medicine and Pharmacology, Dentistry and Oral Surgery
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
,
,
