Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2023; 17(02): 431-438
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1745770
Original Article

Effect of Thickness and Bonding Technique on Fatigue and Fracture Resistance of Feldspathic Ultra-Thin Laminate Veneers

Amna Mohamed Ahmed Hassan Al-Ali
1   Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
,
Nadia Khalifa
1   Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
,
Amir Hadj-Hamou
1   Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
,
Soumya Sheela 
2   Dental Biomaterials Research Laboratory, Research Institute for Medical & Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
,
Hatem M. El-Damanhoury 
1   Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the fatigue and fracture resistance of ultra-thin laminate veneers (UTLV) with two different thicknesses and two different bonding protocols.

Materials and Methods A total of 64 flat enamel surfaces were assigned to either 0.2 or 0.4 mm UTLV. The UTLV were further subdivided and assigned to one of two bonding techniques: adhesive resin cement(RC( or preheated restorative resin composite (HC) (n = 16). Eight samples were fatigued with 750,000 mechanical cycles and 8,000 thermal cycles between 5 and 55°C in a chewing simulator, and the failure mode was evaluated using a stereomicroscope and SEM. The other eight samples from each group were loaded to failure in a universal testing machine to test the fracture resistance. Fisher's exact Probability test was used to analyze the fatigue test results, and two-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni's test were used to analyze the fracture resistance test results.

Results The difference in fatigue resistance between failure proportions in different groups was statistically different (p < 0.05). The 0.4-mm-thick UTLV had similar results regardless of the bonding technique, while 0.2-mm-thick UTLV only showed comparable results when cemented with preheated HC. No statistically significant difference was found in fracture resistance between the tested groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusion The Bonding technique and the thickness of the UTLV had impacted fatigue resistance but had no significant effect on the fracture resistance. bonding of UTLV with preheated composite increases their fatigue resistance. Different testing approaches delivered different results.

Keywords

fatigue resistance - fracture resistance - laminate veneers - preheated composite - resin cement


Publication History

Article published online:
21 June 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Calamia JR. Etched porcelain facial veneers: a new treatment modality based on scientific and clinical evidence. N Y J Dent 1983; 53 (06) 255-259
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ge C, Green CC, Sederstrom DA, McLaren EA, Chalfant JA, White SN. Effect of tooth substrate and porcelain thickness on porcelain veneer failure loads in vitro . J Prosthet Dent 2018; 120 (01) 85-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Gracis S, Thompson VP, Ferencz JL, Silva NR, Bonfante EA. A new classification system for all-ceramic and ceramic-like restorative materials. Int J Prosthodont 2015; 28 (03) 227-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chu S, Ahmad I. A historical perspective of synthetic ceramic and traditional feldspathic porcelain. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2005; 17 (09) 593-598 , quiz 600
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Walls AWG, Steele JG, Wassell RW. Crowns and other extra-coronal restorations: porcelain laminate veneers. Br Dent J 2002; 193 (02) 73-76 , 79–82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bhat VS, Nandish BT. Science of Dental Materials, Clinical Applications. 2nd ed. New Delhi (India):. CBS Publishers and Distributors Pvt Ltd; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Layton DM, Clarke M, Walton TR. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers over 5 and 10 years. Int J Prosthodont 2012; 25 (06) 590-603
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Layton DM, Clarke M. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival of non-feldspathic porcelain veneers over 5 and 10 years. Int J Prosthodont 2013; 26 (02) 111-124
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Heymann HO, Swift EJ, Ritter AV. Sturdevant's Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 6th ed.. St. Louis (MO): Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Shen JZ, Kosmač T.. Advanced Ceramics for Dentistry. Oxford (UK): Butterworth-Heinemann; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Pippin DJ, Mixson JM, Soldan-Els AP. Clinical evaluation of restored maxillary incisors: veneers vs. PFM crowns. J Am Dent Assoc 1995; 126 (11) 1523-1529
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Calamia JR, Calamia CS. Porcelain laminate veneers: reasons for 25 years of success. Dent Clin North Am 2007; 51 (02) 399-417 , ix
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 El-Mowafy O, El-Aawar N, El-Mowafy N. Porcelain veneers: an update. Dent Med Probl 2018; 55 (02) 207-211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Piemjai M, Arksornnukit M. Compressive fracture resistance of porcelain laminates bonded to enamel or dentin with four adhesive systems. J Prosthodont 2007; 16 (06) 457-464
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rickman LJ, Padipatvuthikul P, Chee B. Clinical applications of preheated hybrid resin composite. Br Dent J 2011; 211 (02) 63-67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Friedman MJ. Current state-of-the-art porcelain veneers. Curr Opin Cosmet Dent 1993; 28-33
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Gresnigt MMM, Özcan M, Carvalho M. et al. Effect of luting agent on the load to failure and accelerated-fatigue resistance of lithium disilicate laminate veneers. Dent Mater 2017; 33 (12) 1392-1401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kelly JR. Ceramics in Dentistry: Principles, and Practice. Batavia (IL): Quintessence Publishing. 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Peumans M, De Munck J, Fieuws S, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, Van Meerbeek B. A prospective ten-year clinical trial of porcelain veneers. J Adhes Dent 2004; 6 (01) 65-76
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Friedman MJ. A 15-year review of porcelain veneer failure–a clinician's observations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1998; 19 (06) 625-628 , 630, 632 passim, quiz 638
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Troedson M, Dérand T. Shear stresses in the adhesive layer under porcelain veneers. A finite element method study. Acta Odontol Scand 1998; 56 (05) 257-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Zhang Y, Sailer I, Lawn BR. Fatigue of dental ceramics. J Dent 2013; 41 (12) 1135-1147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Waltimo A, Könönen M. A novel bite force recorder and maximal isometric bite force values for healthy young adults. Scand J Dent Res 1993; 101 (03) 171-175
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rosentritt M, Behr M, van der Zel JM, Feilzer AJ. Approach for valuating the influence of laboratory simulation. Dent Mater 2009; 25 (03) 348-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lucey S, Lynch CD, Ray NJ, Burke FM, Hannigan A. Effect of pre-heating on the viscosity and microhardness of a resin composite. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37 (04) 278-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Coelho NF, Barbon FJ, Machado RG, Boscato N, Moraes RR. Response of composite resins to preheating and the resulting strengthening of luted feldspar ceramic. Dent Mater 2019; 35 (10) 1430-1438
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Marcondes RL, Lima VP, Barbon FJ. et al. Viscosity and thermal kinetics of 10 preheated restorative resin composites and effect of ultrasound energy on film thickness. Dent Mater 2020; 36 (10) 1356-1364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Layton DM, Walton TR. The up to 21-year clinical outcome and survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers: accounting for clustering. Int J Prosthodont 2012; 25 (06) 604-612
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Layton D, Walton T. An up to 16-year prospective study of 304 porcelain veneers. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20 (04) 389-396
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Öztürk E, Bolay Ş, Hickel R, Ilie N. Shear bond strength of porcelain laminate veneers to enamel, dentine and enamel-dentine complex bonded with different adhesive luting systems. J Dent 2013; 41 (02) 97-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar