Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 11, 2025
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
In-vitro comparison of fracture resistance of CAD/CAM porcelain restorations for endodontically treated molars
İsmail Uzun1, Ata Hikmet Timur2, Kevser Şenel3
1Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. ismail.uzun@omu.edu.tr.
Background:
This study evaluates the fracture strength and patterns of feldspathic porcelain restorations made using CAD/CAM technology for lower first molars with extensive crown destruction. The restorations include post-core and full-contour crown, composite resin core and full-contour crown, and endocrown. This research provides insights into effective restorative options to address tooth fracture risk, supporting minimally invasive procedures and CAD/CAM integration in dental practices.
Methods:
This study utilized 80 permanent mandibular first molars, which were divided into four groups: Group I (Post-Core-Full-contour crown), Group II (Core- Full-contour crown), Group III (Endocrown), and Group IV (Control). Root canal treatment was performed on all samples except for the control group. Following access cavity preparation, restorations for each tooth were fabricated using the CAD/CAM system and cemented with resin cement. The specimens were embedded in acrylic blocks. After undergoing thermomechanical aging, the samples were subjected to fracture resistance testing using a universal testing machine, which applied force until fracture occurred. The fracture patterns were subsequently analyzed, and the data were statistically evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-Square tests (p < 0.05).
Results:
A significant difference in fracture values under axial forces was observed (p < 0.05). The control group had the highest fracture strength (1830 ± 277 N), while the Core- full-contour crown group showed the lowest (1532 ± 371 N). Failure types varied significantly among the groups (χ2 = 26.886, df = 9, p = 0.001). The most common failure type was Type-2 (33.75%), characterized by restorable fractures, while Type-3 fractures, unrestorable, were the least common (12.5%).
Conclusions:
The findings underscore the significance of technological advancements in CAD/CAM for effectively restoring endodontically treated teeth with extensive crown damage. This study contributes valuable insights, emphasizing the clinical relevance of selecting appropriate restorative options to mitigate the risk of tooth fracture associated with coronal restoration failures.
