Fracture Toughness of Monolithic Zirconia and Lithium Disilicate CAD/CAM Endocrown

Aldrina Wulan Eka Suci; Dina Ratnasari; Ade Prijanti Dwisaptarini; Elline Elline

doi:10.32793/jida.v6i3.968

Aldrina Wulan Eka Suci Fakultas Kedokteran Gigi Universitas Trisakti Jakarta
Dina Ratnasari Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Trisakti, Indonesia http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2325-9106
Ade Prijanti Dwisaptarini Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Trisakti, Indonesia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5818-6923
Elline Elline Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Trisakti, Indonesia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2525-2058

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32793/jida.v6i3.968

Abstract

Introduction: Endocrown is an indirect restoration following the endodontic treatment made of ceramic material as a substitute for post core crown. The endocrown is cemented to the inner wall of the pulp chamber and to the cavity margins to increase the macromechanical retention. Material commonly used are monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate; both can be obtained using the CAD/CAM technique. Good endocrown restoration must be able to handle the chewing workload especially on the posterior tooth. Objective: To determine the difference in fracture toughness of monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate CAD/CAM endocrown. Methods: This study used 6 endocrown CAD/CAM samples, attached to typodont prototype in 3D resin printing model produced by the printing machine. Samples were divided into 2 groups. Group A were monolithic zirconia endocrowns and group B were lithium disilicate endocrowns. The fracture toughness was calculated using the Universal Testing Machine (UTM). Results: Fracture toughness of the monolithic zirconia endocrown were 2.747 N and lithium disilicate were 769 N. The unpaired t test showed that there was significant difference in fracture toughness between groups (p < 0,05). Conclusion: Monolithic zirconia endocrown has a higher fracture toughness compared to the lithium disilicate endocrown, but lithium disilicate is more recommended as an endocrown restoration material because its fracture toughness is closer to masticatory load of posterior teeth.

References

Kalalo WW, Khoman JA, Supit ASR. Restoration of post root canal treatment. E-GiGi. 2022; 10(1): 75-80.
Dogui H, Abdelmalek F, Amor A, Douki N. Endocrown: an alternative approach for restoring endodontically treated molars with large coronal destruction. Case Rep Dent. 2018; 1-6.
Irmaleny, Zuleika, Ardjanggi S, Mardiyah AA, Wahjuningrum DA. Endocrown restoration on postendodontics treatment on lower first molar. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2019; 9(3): 303-10.
Stefani R. Restorasi endocrown gigi molar pertama rahang atas pasca perawatan endodontik. JKGT. 2019; 1(2): 18-20.
Marthios S, Winanto SS, Elline. Endocrown as a final restoration for endodontically treated teeth with chronic apical abscess- a case report. Proceeding International Scientific Meeting (TINI IV) & IKORGI National Congress XI. 2017; 423-8.
Alexander P, Fibryanto E, Ariwibowo T. Retaining extensive cavity hyperplastic pulpitis mandibular first molar with pulpectomy and endocrown: a case report. Proceeding International Scientific Meeting (TINI IV) & IKORGI National Congress XI. 2017; 371-4.
Zou Y, Bai J, Xiang J. Clinical performance of CAD/CAM-fabricated monolithic zirconia endocrowns on molars with extensive coronal loss of substance. Int J Comput Dent. 2018; 21(3): 225-32.
Nistor L, Gradinaru M, Rica R, Marasescu P, Stan M, Manolea H, et al. Zirconia use in dentistry-manufacturing and properties. Curr Health Sci J. 2019; 45(1): 28-35.
Ningsih JR, Saskianingtyas YS. Zirconia dan resin komposit sebagai restorasi indirek pada gigi posterior. DENSIUM. 2021; 106-14.
Kontonasaki E, Rigos AE, Ilia C, Istantsos T. Monolithic zirconia: an update to current knowledge. optical properties, wear, and clinical performance. Dent J. 2019; 7(3): 90
Vijayakumar JB, Varadan P, Balaji L, Rajan M, Kalaiselvam R, Saeralaathan S, et al. Fracture resistance of resin based and lithium disilicate endocrowns. which is better? – a systematic review of in-vitro studies. Biomater Investig Dent. 2021; 8(1): 104-11.
Zhang P, Ma L, Fan F, Zeng Z, Peng C, Loya PE, et al. Fracture toughness of graphene. Nat Commun. 2014; 5(1): 1-7.
Altamimi AM, Tripodakis APD, Eliades G, Hirayama H. Comparison of fracture resistance and fracture characterization of bilayered zirconia/fluorapatite and monolithic lithium disilicate all ceramic crowns. Int J Esthet Dent. 2014; 9(1): 98-110.
Kontonasaki E, Giasimakopoulos P, Rigos AE. Strength and aging resistance of monolithic zirconia: an update to current knowledge. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2020; 56(1): 1-23.
Irfan UB, Aslam K, Nadim R. A review on CAD CAM in dentistry. JPDA. 2015; 24(3): 112-6.
Papalexopoulos D, Samartzi TK, Sarafianou A. A thorough analysis of the endocrown restoration: a literature review. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021; 22(4): 422-6.
Young A. Three reasons why zirconia is the best material for dental restoration [Internet]. Dentistry Today. 2021 [cited 2022 Des 29]. Available from: https://www.dentistrytoday.com/three-reasons-why-zirconia-is-the-best-material-for-dental-restoration/
Madfa AA, Al-Sanabani FA, Al-Qudami NH, Al-Sanabani JS, Amran AG. Use of zirconia in dentistry: an overview. Open Biomater J. 2014; 5(1): 1-9.
Nakamura K, Mouhat M, Nergard JM, Lægreid SJ, Kanno T, Milleding P, et al. Effect of cements on fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia crowns. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2016; 2(1): 12-9.
Badung DAMM. Analisa Ketahanan Gigi Tiruan Jembatan Fiber-Reinforced Composite Terhadap Fraktur dan Gambaran Fraktur yang Terjadi [Skripsi]. Jakarta: Fakultas Kedokteran Gigi Universitas Indonesia; 2012.