Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 8, 2026

Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Force-to-failure of a simulated implant-supported complete fixed dental prosthesis reinforced with glass fiber
Jack Goldberg1, Gelareh Ronaghi2, Jin-Ho Phark2
1Former graduate student, Advanced Prosthodontics, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry, University of Southern California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, Calif; and Private practice, Mexico City, Mexico.
Statement Of Problem:
The joint adjacent to the cantilevered section of an implant-supported complete fixed dental prosthesis (ICFDP) undergoes the most stress because of force magnification in this area, making it more prone to mechanical failure.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the ultimate force-to-failure distal to the terminal implant of a simulated ICFDP reinforced with glass fiber compared with that of a conventionally fabricated prosthesis.
Material And Methods:
Thirty ICFDPs with bilateral distal cantilevers were fabricated and divided into 3 groups: the not-reinforced (NR) group was processed without reinforcement, the glass-fiber-reinforced (GR) group was reinforced with glass fiber, and the titanium-reinforced (TR) group was fabricated with a titanium bar. The specimens were screw-retained onto a standardized mandibular model with 4-implant analogs embedded in acrylic resin. All groups were processed using heat-polymerized acrylic resin. After 24 hours, the cantilevers were loaded to fracture (in N) 10 mm away from the center of the most distal analog under compression at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Statistical analysis of data was performed using a 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) model by using Tukey B post hoc comparison procedures (α=.05).
Results:
Data revealed the mean fracture load of the NR group was 1073 ±108 N, 1400.75 ±123.53 N for the GR group, and 1652.78 ±274.14 N for the TR group. Statistically significant differences (P<.05) were found among all 3 groups. Comparison between the left and right side of the tested prostheses did not show any significant differences (P=.595).
Conclusions:
A fiber-reinforced ICFDP provides better biomechanical properties than an unreinforced one, which may allow its longer-term use as an interim ICFDP. However, the titanium bar ICFDP still provided the best resistance to fracture.
Related Concept Videos
Fatigue
Fiber Reinforced Concrete

