Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Stress distribution difference between Lava Ultimate full crowns and IPS e.max CAD full crowns on a natural tooth and on tooth-shaped implant abutments

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The goal of this short communication is to present finite element analysis comparison of the stress distribution between CAD/CAM full crowns made of Lava Ultimate and of IPS e.max CAD, adhesively luted to natural teeth and to implant abutments with the shape of natural teeth. Six 3D models were prepared using a 3D content-creating software, based on a micro-CT scan of a human mandibular molar. The geometry of the full crown and of the abutment was the same for all models representing Lava Ultimate full crowns (L) and IPS e.max CAD full crowns (E) on three different abutments: prepared natural tooth (n), titanium abutment (t) and zirconia abutment (z). A static load of 400 N was applied on the vestibular and lingual cusps, and fixtures were applied to the base of the models. After running the static linear analysis, the post-processing data we analyzed. The stress values at the interface between the crown and the abutment of the Lt and Lz groups were significantly higher than the stress values at the same interface of all the other models. The high stress concentration in the adhesive at the interface between the crown and the abutment of the Lava Ultimate group on implants might be one of the factors contributing to the reported debondings of crowns.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Chen C, Trindade FZ, De Jager N, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. The fracture resistance of a CAD/CAM Resin Nano Ceramic (RNC) and a CAD ceramic at different thicknesses. Dent Mater. 2014;30:954–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ziskind D, Hasday M, Cohen SR, Wagner HD. Young’s modulus of peritubular and intertubular human dentin by nano-indentation tests. J Struct Biol. 2011;174:23–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Niinomi M. Mechanical biocompatibilities of titanium alloys for biomedical applications. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2008;1:30–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Piconi C, Maccauro G. Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial. Biomaterials. 1999;20:1–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ho MCC. Lava Ultimate––Standard for inlays/onlys but perhaps not for Implant. September 2012. http://noordinarydentist.com/2012/09/16/lava-ultimate-standard-for-inlaysonlys-but-perhaps-not-for-implant/. Accessed 18 Feb 2016.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to René Daher.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krejci, I., Daher, R. Stress distribution difference between Lava Ultimate full crowns and IPS e.max CAD full crowns on a natural tooth and on tooth-shaped implant abutments. Odontology 105, 254–256 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-016-0276-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-016-0276-z

Keywords

Navigation