DEĞİŞİK YÖNTEMLERLE HAZIRLANAN METAL ALT YAPILAR ÜZERİNDEKİ VENEER PORSELENLERİNİN KIRILMA DİRENCİNE FARKLI ALT YAPI ŞEKİLLERİNİN ETKİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ≠

Year 2016, Volume: 26 Issue: 3, 457 - 464, 01.12.2016

Zeynep Yeşil Duymuş , Murat Alkurt

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.290294

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada,  değişik yöntemlerle hazırlanan metal alt
yapılar üzerindeki veneer porselenlerinin kırılma direnci üzerine farklı alt
yapı şekillerinin etkisi incelenmiştir.

Materyal
ve Metod:
Chamfer bitim hatlı olarak kesilmiş üst 1. küçük azı dişini temsil eden metal
güdükler anatomik oklüzal yüzeyli ve düz oklüzal yüzeyli olarak iki değişik
şekilde CNC torna tezgahında hazırlanmış,
alınan ölçülerden 30 adet epoksi rezin güdük elde edilmiştir. Farklı yöntemlerle elde edilen metal alt yapılar
üzerine üst yapı porseleni uygulanarak kuronlar hazırlanmıştır. Epoksi rezin
güdükler kuronlar üzerine simante edilmiş ve veneer porselenlerinin kırılma
dirençleri Universal test cihazında değerlendirilmiştir.

Bulgular: Kırılma direnci değerleri üzerine alt yapı şekli ve
hazırlama yöntemlerinin etkisinin anlamlı olduğu varyans analizi ile
saptanmıştır (p<0.05).

Sonuç:
Çalışmada anatomik
alt yapılar üzerinde freze tekniğiyle hazırlanan veneer seramiklerinde en
yüksek kırılma direnci değerleri tespit edilmiştir.

• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Anahtar Kelimeler: Metal alt yapılar, alt yapı şekli, kırılma direnci.
  

AN ANALYSIS OVER THE EFFECT OF COPING DESIGN ON THE
FRACTURE RESISTANCE OF VENEER PORCELAINS APPLIED ON METAL FRAMEWORKS PREPARED
THROUGH VARIOUS METHODS

ABSTRACT

 Aim: In this study, the effect of different metal framework methods and
coping design on the fracture resistance of veneer porcelains.

Materials and Methods: Two different metal
dies having anatomic and smooth occlusal surface designs were manufactured
using CNC machine to simulate prepared upper first premolar tooth with chamfer
finish line, impressions were taken and 30 epoxy resin dies were produced
subsequently. Veneering ceramics were applied on metal frameworks which were
produced by different methods and crowns were finished. Crowns were cemented on
to the epoxy resin dies and fracture strength of veneering ceramics were
evaluated using Universal Testing Machine.

Results: Variance analyses demonstrated that
framework design and manufacturing methods had a significant effect on fracture
strength of tested specimens (p<0.05).

Conclusion: In this study,
veneering ceramics which were applied on anatomically shaped milled frame- works
showed the highest fracture strength values. 

Key
Words: Metal frameworks, coping design, fracture
resistance

Keywords

Metal alt yapılar, alt yapı şekli

References

• . Rosenstiel SF, Land M, Fujimoto J. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Elsevier 2000:795-800.
• 2. Roberts DH. The failure of retainers in bridge prostheses. An analysis of retainers. Brit Dent J 1970;128:117-24.
• 3. Llobell A, Nicholls JI, Kois JC, Daly CH. Fatigue life of porcelain repair systems. Int J Prosthodont 1992;5:205-13.
• 4. Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Bayardo-Gonzalez DE, Thompson VP, Bonfante G. Effect of framework design on crown failure. Eur J Oral Sci 2009;194-9.
• 5. Omori S, Komada W, Yoshida K, Miura H. Effect of thickness of zirconia-ceramic crown frameworks on strength and fracture pattern. Dent Mater J 2013;32: 189-94.
• 6. Akın E. Diş Hekimliğinde Porselen. 2th ed. İstanbul, İstanbul Üniversitesi Basımevi. 1983:p.1-26.
• 7. Blatz MB, Sadan A, Kern M. Resin-ceramic bonding: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:268-74.
• 8. Craig RG. Restorative Properties in Restorative Dental Materials. New York: Mosby Publication, 2002: p.551-92.
• 9. Jones DW. Development of dental ceramics. An historical perspective. Dent Clin North Am 1985;29:621-44.
• 10. Anusavice K. In: Phillips' Science of Dental Materials.11th ed. Missouri, Saunders Publication 2003:p.655-719.
• Sundh A, Sjogren G. A comparison of fracture strength of yttrium-oxide- partiallystabilized zirconia ceramic crowns with varying core thickness, shapes and veneer ceramics. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31:682-8.
• 22. Ambre MJ, Aschan F, Vult von Steyern P. Fracture strength of yttria-stabilized zirconium-dioxide (Y-TZP) fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with different abutment core thicknesses and connector dimensions. J Prosthodontics 2013; 22:377-82.
• 23. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Augthun M, Spiekermann H. Fracture resistance of lithium disilicate-, alumina-, and zirconia-based three-unit fixed partial dentures: a laboratory study. Int J Prosthodont 2001;14:231-8.
• 24. Filser F, Luthy H, Kocher P, Scharer P, LJ. G. Posterior all-ceramic bridgework. Quintessence of Dental Technology, 2003;1:28-41.
• 25. Cho L, Choi J, Yi YJ, Park CJ. Effect of finish line variants on marginal accuracy and fracture strength of ceramic optimized polymer/fiber-reinforced composite crowns. J Prosthetic Dent 2004;91:554-60.
• 26. Piwowarczyk A, Lauer HC, Sorensen JA. In vitro shear bond strength of cementing agents to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:265-73.
• 27. Fabianelli A, Goracci C, Bertelli E, Monticelli F, Grandini S, Ferrari M. In vitro evaluation of wall-to-wall adaptation of a self-adhesive resin cement used for luting gold and ceramic inlays. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:33-40.
• 28. Zaimoğlu A, Can G. Sabit Protezler. 1th ed. Ankara, Ankara Üniversitesi Baskı, 2004:90-105.
• 29. Bagby M, Marshall S, Marshall Jr G. Metal ceramic compatibility: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:21-5.
• 30. Smith TB, Kelly JR, Tesk JA. In vitro fracture behavior of ceramic and metal ceramic restorations. J Prosthodontics 1994;3:138-44
• Rosentritt M, Steiger D, Behr M, Handel G, Kolbeck C. Influence of substructure design and spacer settings on the in vitro performance of molar zirconia crowns. J Dent 2009;37:978-83.
• 42. Molin MK, Karlsson SL. Five-year clinical prospective evaluation of zirconiabased
• Denzir 3-unit FPDs. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:223-7.
• 43. Forsh WY, Graig RG. Distrubution of stresses in porcelain fused to metal and porcelain jacket crowns. J Dent Res 1975;5:255.
• 44. Ortorp A, Jönsson D, Mouhsen A, Von Steyren PV (2011). The fit of cobalt-chromium three unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: A comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 27:356-63.
• 45. Takahashi T, Gunne J. Fit of implant frameworks: An in-vitro comparison between two fabrication technique. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89: 256-60.
• 46. Mörmann WH, Bindl A. All ceramic, chair-side computer-aided design/computer-aided machining restorations. Dent Clin North Am 2002; 46: 405-26.
• 47. Akova T, Ucar Y, Tukay A, Balkaya MC, Brantley WA. Comparison of the bond strength of laser-sintered and cast base metal dental alloys to porcelain. Dent Mater 2008;24:1400-4.
• 48. Suleiman SH, Vult von Steyern P. Fracture strength of porcelain fused to metal crowns made of cast, milled or laser-sintered cobalt-chromium. Acta Odontologica Scand 2013;5:1280-1289.
• 49. Papazoglou E, Brantley WA, Carr AB, Johnston WM. Porcelain adherence to high-palladium alloys. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70: 386-94