Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative evaluation of the mechanical properties of CAD/CAM dental blocks

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study compares the mechanical properties of commercially available CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing) millable dental blocks including Vita Enamic, Lava Ultimate, and MAZIC Duro. All the discs were cut in dimension of 1.2 mm in thickness and 12 mm in diameter, ground up to #1200 Sic papers and polished. The biaxial flexure strength of the ceramic discs was measured after thermocycling treatment and the broken surfaces were observed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The discs were brushed using a toothbrush testing machine under a 150 g load. Surface roughness and morphology were determined after toothbrushing cycles. Finally, the friction and wear behavior of the materials against an opposing tooth were studied using a reciprocating pin-on-plate test configuration. The vertical loss of dental cusp was measured, and the surface image was examined using field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM). The biaxial flexural strength data were subjected to Weibull analysis. To compare the significance between the groups, all data were analyzed by one-way analysis (ANOVA). The biaxial flexural strength of the Lava Ultimate and MAZIC Duro materials is significantly higher than that of Vita Enamic. In addition, Lava Ultimate and MAZIC Duro exhibited significantly smoother surfaces than that of Vita Enamic after toothbrushing. Lava Ultimate and MAZIC Duro also showed less wear to the opposing tooth than that of Vita Enamic. In addition, Lava Ultimate possesses more suitable mechanical properties than the Vita Enamic and Mazic Duro for use in oral clinical prosthesis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J. 2009;28:44–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Miyazaki T, Nakamura T, Matsumura H, Ban S, Kobayashi T. Current status of zirconia restoration. J Prosthodont Res. 2013;57:236–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boitelle P, Mawussi B, Tapie L, Fromentin O. A systematic review of CAD/CAM fit restoration evaluations. J Oral Rehabil. 2014;41:853–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fasbinder DJ. Computerized technology for restorative dentistry. Am J Dent. 2013;26:115–20.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Liu P-R, Essig ME. Panorama of dental CAD/CAM restorative systems. Compend Contin Educ Dent (Jamesburg, NJ 1995). 2008;29:482–84.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent. 2001;3:45–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Buonocore memorial lecture. review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent. 2004;29:481–508.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Giordano R. Materials for chairside CAD/CAM–produced restorations. J Am Dent Assoc Am Dental Assoc. 2006;137:14S–21S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lauvahutanon S, Takahashi H, Shiozawa M, Iwasaki N, Asakawa Y, Oki M, et al. Mechanical properties of composite resin blocks for CAD/CAM. Dent Mater J. 2014;33:705–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Martin MP. Material and clinical considerations for full-coverage indirect restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2012;33:2–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Koller M, Arnetzl GV, Holly L, Arnetzl G. Lava ultimate resin nano ceramic for CAD/CAM: customization case study. Int J Comput Dent. 2012;15:159–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yamanel K, Çaglar A, GÜLSAHI K, Özden UA. Effects of different ceramic and composite materials on stress distribution in inlay and onlay cavities: 3-D finite element analysis. Dent Mater J. 2009;28:661–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Höland W, Schweiger M, Watzke R, Peschke A, Kappert H. Ceramics as biomaterials for dental restoration. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2008;5:729–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Özcan M, Barbosa SH, Melo RM, Galhano GÁP, Bottino MA. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater. 2007;23:1276–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rinastiti M, Özcan M, Siswomihardjo W, Busscher HJ. Effects of surface conditioning on repair bond strengths of non-aged and aged microhybrid, nanohybrid, and nanofilled composite resins. Clin Oral Investig. 2011;15:625–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Matinlinna JP. Handbook of oral biomaterials. CRC press, Boca Raton 2014.

  17. Ritter JE. Predicting lifetimes of materials and material structures. Dent Mater Elsevier. 1995;11:142–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kelly JR. Perspectives on strength. Dent Mater. 1995;11:103–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. van der Zwaag S. The concept of filament strength and the Weibull modulus. J Test Eval ASTM Int. 1989;17:292–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Choi BJ, Kim SC, Im YW, Lee JW, Lee HH. Uniaxial and biaxial flexural strengths of resin-composite CAD-CAM blocks. Dent Mater. 2015;31:e31–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bakke M, Holm B, Jensen BL, Michler L, Møller E. Unilateral, isometric bite force in 8-68-year-old women and men related to occlusal factors. Eur J Oral Sci Wiley Online Library. 1990;98:149–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Helkimo E, Carlsson GE, Helkimo M. Bite force and state of dentition. Acta Odontol Scand Taylor Francis. 1977;35:297–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Alonso V, Caserio M. A clinical study of direct composite full-coverage crowns: long-term results. Oper Dent. 2012;37:432–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Preissner S, Kostka E, Blunck U. A noninvasive treatment of amelogenesis imperfecta. Quintessence Int (Berl). 2013;44.

  25. Güth J, Almeida E, Silva JS, Ramberger M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Treatment concept with CAD/CAM-fabricated high-density polymer temporary restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2012;24:310–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Harrington E, Jones PA, Fisher SEWH. Toothbrush-dentifrice abrasion-a suggested standard method. Br Dent J. 1982;153:135–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. DeLong R. Intra-oral restorative materials wear: rethinking the current approaches: how to measure wear. Dent Mater. 2006;22:702–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hara AT, Livengood SV, Lippert F, Eckert GJ, Ungar PS. Dental surface texture characterization based on erosive tooth wear processes. J Dent Res. 2016;95:537–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Figueiredo-Pina CG, Patas N, Canhoto J, Cláudio R, Olhero SM, Serro AP, et al. Tribological behaviour of unveneered and veneered lithium disilicate dental material. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016;53:226–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lambrechts P, Debels E, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B. How to simulate wear?: overview of existing methods. Dent Mater. 2006;22:693–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kadokawa A, Suzuki S, Tanaka T. Wear evaluation of porcelain opposing gold, composite resin, and enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96:258–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Harrison A. Wear of combinations of acrylic resin and porcelain, on an abrasion testing machine. J Oral Rehabil. 1978;5:111–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Elmaria A, Goldstein G, Vijayaraghavan T, Legeros RZ, Hittelman EL. An evaluation of wear when enamel is opposed by various ceramic materials and gold. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96:345–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Preis V, Behr M, Handel G, Schneider-Feyrer S, Hahnel S, Rosentritt M. Wear performance of dental ceramics after grinding and polishing treatments. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2012;10:13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Osiewicz MA, Werner A, Pytko-Polonczyk J, Roeters FJM, Kleverlaan CJ. Contact-and contact-free wear between various resin composites. Dent Mater. 2015;31:134–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hahnel S, Schultz S, Trempler C, Ach B, Handel G, Rosentritt M. Two-body wear of dental restorative materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2011;4:237–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Condon JRFJL. Evaluation of composite wear with a new multi-mode oral wear simulator. Dent Mater. 1996;12(4):218–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Mair LH, Stolarski TA, Vowles RW, Lloyd CH. Wear: mechanisms, manifestations and measurement. Report of a workshop. J Dent. 1996;24:141–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research did not receive any specific Grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dental Biomaterials, School of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University, 664-14, Duckjin-dong, Jeonju, 561-756, Republic of Korea

    Ruizhi Yin, Yu-Kyoung Kim, Yong-Seok Jang, Min-Ho Lee & Tae-Sung Bae

  2. Department of Prosthodontics, Institute of Oral Bio-Science, School of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University and Research Institute of Clinical Medicine of Chonbuk National University-Biomedical Research Institute of Chonbuk National University, 664-14, Duckjin-dong, Jeonju, 561-756, Republic of Korea

    Jung-Jin Lee

Authors
  1. Ruizhi Yin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yu-Kyoung Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yong-Seok Jang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jung-Jin Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Min-Ho Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tae-Sung Bae
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tae-Sung Bae.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yin, R., Kim, YK., Jang, YS. et al. Comparative evaluation of the mechanical properties of CAD/CAM dental blocks. Odontology 107, 360–367 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0407-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0407-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation