Comparison of fracture-load values of cantilevered FDPs

Abstract

Objective. Evaluation of the effect of different framework designs and of fatigue on the fracture-load values of cantilevered fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). The load values were compared with those for lithium disilicate ceramic and metal–ceramic FDPs. Materials and methods. Fifty cantilevered FDPs were manufactured using a zirconia framework veneered with a feldspathic ceramic. Ten FDPs were made from a lithium disilicate ceramic and 10 were designed as metal–ceramic FDPs. All FDPs were anchored by two premolar crowns to replace a missing premolar. Twenty of the 50 zirconia FDPs were regarded as the control groups; these were divided into two groups—with and without fatigue. The other 30 zirconia FDPs were divided into three test groups with different framework designs. The load to fracture was measured and fracture sites were identified. The Kruskal–Wallis test and the Mann–Whitney U-test were used for statistical analysis. Results. Most of the all-ceramic FDPs fractured within the distal wall of the terminal crown abutment. The mean fracture-load ranged between 346–493 N for the FDPs with the 0.7 mm framework. Mean values for the three zirconia test groups ranged from 529–590 N. Reinforcement of the framework resulted in significantly higher fracture-loads than for the control group. Values for lithium disilicate restorations were significantly lower than those for the test groups and the values for the metal–ceramic group were significantly higher than those for the test groups. Conclusion. Although reinforcement of the distal crown core might enhance the fracture resistance of all-ceramic cantilever FPDs, they cannot yet be unreservedly recommended for clinical use.

Key Words::

• cantilever
• fdp
• zirconia

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to 3M Espe, Seefeld, Germany for supplying the study materials and for supporting this study.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.