Fracture Resistance and Retention of Three Different Endocrown Materials | ||||
| Al-Azhar Journal of Dentistry | ||||
| Volume 2020, Issue 4, April 2020 | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjg.2020.11248.1135 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Nada Eisa1; Eman Essam2; Rania Amin3; Zainab EL Sharkawy4 | ||||
| 1Dentist at ministry of health, Egypt | ||||
| 2Professor of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Assistant Professor, Crown and Bridge Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, AL-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||||
| 4Lecturer, Crowns and Bridges Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar University, , Cairo, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to assess fracture resistance and retention of three different endocrown materials. Materials and Methods: Thirty (n=30) sound mandibular molars were endodontically treated and according to endocrown constructed material appointed arbitrarily into 3 groups (n=10 each); Group (1): IPS e.max CAD, Group (2): Vita Suprinity and Group (3): Vita Enamic. Samples of each group were additionally subdivided into2 subgroups (n=5 each) according to fracture resistance and retention tests. Subgroup (A): Samples subjected to fracture resistance test and mode of failure. Subgroup (B): Samples subjected to retention test and mode of failure. The samples were thermocycled and seated on a universal testing machine and subjected to fracture resistance and retention test, then Data were statistically analyzed. Results: The highest mean failure load was recorded for Vita Suprinity endocrowns, followed by IPS e-max endocrowns, while Vita Enamic endocrowns recorded the lowest mean failure load.A non-statistically significant difference between the three tested groups of subgroup (A) revealed by using ANOVA test.The highest debonding load was recorded for Vita Enamic endocrowns, followed by IPS e-max CAD endocrowns, while the lowest mean debonding was recorded for Vita Suprinity endocrowns. A non-statistically significant difference between the three tested groups of subgroup (B) revealed by using ANOVA test. Conclusions: Endocrowns of Vita Suprinity showed higher mean failure load value compared to endocrowns of E-max CAD and Vita Enamic. While endocrowns of Vita Enamic showed higher mean debonding load value compared to E-max CAD and Vita Suprinity. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Fracture resistance; E-max CAD; Vita Suprinity; Vita Enamic | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 9 |
||||
