A randomized controlled clinical trial on press and block lithium disilicate partial crowns: A 4-year recall.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical performances of two lithium disilicate systems (Initial LiSi press vs Initial LiSi Block, GC Co.) using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria and survival rates after 4 years of clinical service. METHODS: Partial adhesive crowns on natural abutment posterior teeth were made on 60 subjects who were randomly divided into two groups: Group 1: Initial LiSi press and Group 2: Initial LiSi Block. Fabrication of partial crowns was made with full analog and digital procedure in Groups 1 and 2 respectively. The restorations were followed-up for 1 and 4 years, and the modified USPHS evaluation was performed at baseline and each recall together with periodontal evaluation. Contingency tables to assess for significant differences of success over time in each group and time-dependent Cox regression to test for differences between the two groups were used and the level of significance was set at P< 0.05. RESULTS: Regarding modified USPHS scores, all evaluated parameters showed Alpha or Bravo and no Charlie was recorded. No statistically significant difference emerged between the two groups in any of the assessed variables (P> 0.05). No statistically significant difference between scores recorded at the baseline and each recall. All modified USPHS scores were compatible with the outcome of clinical success and no one restoration was replaced or repaired, and the survival rate was 100% after 4 years of clinical service. No difference was found between traditional and digital procedure to fabricate the crowns. The two lithium disilicate materials showed similar results after 4 years of clinical service. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The crowns made with the two tested lithium disilicate materials with analog and digital procedures showed 100% survival after 4 years of clinical service with no statistically significant difference using the modified USPHS scores.

Fracture Strength of Zirconia and Alumina Ceramic Crowns Supported by Implants.

Due to the brittleness and limited tensile strength of the veneering glass-ceramic materials, the methods that combine strong core material (as zirconia or alumina) are still under debate. The present study aims to evaluate the fracture strength and the mechanism of failure through fractographic analysis of single all-ceramic crowns supported by implants. Forty premolar cores were fabricated with CAD/CAM technology using alumina (n = 20) and zirconia (n = 20). The specimens were veneered with glass-ceramic, cemented on titanium abutments, and subjected to loading test until fracture. SEM fractographic analysis was also performed. The fracture load was 1165 (±509) N for alumina and 1638 (±662) N for zirconia with a statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.026). Fractographic analysis of alumina-glass-ceramic crowns, showed the presence of catastrophic cracks through the entire thickness of the alumina core; for the zirconia-glass-ceramic crowns, the cracks involved mainly the thickness of the ceramic veneering layer. The sandblast procedure of the zirconia core influenced crack path deflection. Few samples (n = 3) showed limited microcracks of the zirconia core. Zirconia showed a significantly higher fracture strength value in implant-supported restorations, indicating the role played by the high resistant cores for premolar crowns.