ABSTRACT
The original study by this group compared the crushing strength of Cerestore crowns with porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns and porcelain jackets. Since that time, two porcelains, Dicor and Renaissance, have become available. This study compares Cerestore, Dicor, and Renaissance crowns using a porcelain-fused-to-metal crown as a standard for the type of crown with maximum strength that is currently available and an all-porcelain crown to represent the porcelain with the least strength. All of the methods used in the first study were used again. The results demonstrated that these new porcelains have strengths that make them questionable for routine use in every posterior crown situation.
Subject(s)
Ceramics/chemistry , Crowns , Dental Porcelain/chemistry , Aluminum Oxide/chemistry , Dental Alloys/chemistry , Dental Stress Analysis , Stress, Mechanical , Surface PropertiesABSTRACT
Eighteen crowns were subjected to the same occlusal loading. The porcelain-fused-to-metal crown was more than twice as resistant to the load than the Cerestore crown and almost four times stronger than the porcelain crown. These tests show that porcelain fused to metal has demonstrated its capability as a strong posterior restoration. The Cerestore crown, though superior to the porcelain crown, is significantly less resistant to fracture than the porcelain-fused-to-metal restoration.