Laboratory Evaluation of the Fracture Resistance of CAD/CAM- Manufactured Zirconium Crown on Primary Teeth: A Comparison of Two Different Cement Types and Gap Widths

Nouf Al Humayyani^1,

¹Prosthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry ,Taif University, Taif, KSA

Cite this paper:
Nouf Al Humayyani. Laboratory Evaluation of the Fracture Resistance of CAD/CAM- Manufactured Zirconium Crown on Primary Teeth: A Comparison of Two Different Cement Types and Gap Widths. American Journal of Biomedical Research. 2025; 13(1):15-19. doi: 10.12691/ajbr-13-1-3

Abstract

Background: The current research aimed to assess the outcome of dissimilar cement types on the strength of zirconium crowns fabricated by a computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system at varying occlusal cement gap widths for primary molars. Methods: A total of 40 extracted mandibular deciduous 2^nd. molars were prepared and randomly allocated into two main sets and two subgroups, totaling 4 groups according to the cement type and occlusal gap width. After preparation, the deciduous molars were implanted in methyl methacrylate blocks. The restorations were made-up from zirconium (InCoris TZI C, Sirona Dental Systems, GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) using CAD/CAM system, with occlusal cement gap widths of 100 µm and 200 µm, and were then glass ionomer cement and adhesive resin cements were used to cement the crowns. Fracture strength was measured for all samples at a crossheading speed of 10 mm/min, and the values were verified in Newtons (N). statistical analysis of results were done through the Shapiro–Wilk normality test and independent t-tests. A significance level of p < 0.05 was used for all analyses. Results: Cement type and cement gap width had statistically insignificant effect on the zirconium fracture strength of (p > 0.05). The greatest fracture resistance was detected in the 100 µm cement gap and adhesive resin cement group (3847±984,74 N). Conclusions: Zirconia crowns fabricated using CAD/CAM technology demonstrated high fracture strength when placed on primary teeth. Different cement types and gap widths may be considered clinically acceptable alternatives in pediatric applications.

Keywords:
Fracture resistance CAD/CAM zirconia crown cement gap primary molar

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Selwitz RH, Ismail AI, Pitts NB. Dental caries. Lancet. 2007; 369(9555): 51-9.
[2]	Goldberg M. Deciduous tooth and dental caries. Ann Pediatr Child Health. 2017; 5: 1120.
[3]	Kindelan SA, Day P, Nichol R, Willmott N, Fayle SA; British Society of Paediatric Dentistry. UK National Clinical Guidelines in Paediatric Dentistry: stainless steel preformed crowns for primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2008; 18 Suppl 1: 20-8.
[4]	Beattie S, Taskonak B, Jones J, Chin J, Sanders B, Tomlin A, Weddell J. Fracture resistance of 3 types of primary esthetic stainless steel crowns. J Can Dent Assoc. 2011; 77: b90.
[5]	Townsend JA, Knoell P, Yu Q, Zhang JF, Wang Y, Zhu H, Beattie S, Xu X. In vitro fracture resistance of three commercially available zirconia crowns for primary molars. Pediatr Dent. 2014; 36(5): 125-9.
[6]	Pathak P. CAD-CAM in pediatric dentistry. Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry. 2024, 42.
[7]	Mourouzis P, Arhakis A, Tolidis K. Computer-aided Design and Manufacturing Crown on Primary Molars: An Innovative Case Report. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2019; 12(1): 76-79.
[8]	Diaz-Arnold AM, Vargas MA, Haselton DR. Current status of luting agents for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81(2): 135-41.
[9]	Pegoraro TA, da Silva NR, Carvalho RM. Cements for use in esthetic dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2007; 51(2): 453-71, x.
[10]	O’Brien, W. J. Dental materials and their selection. 3 rd ed. USA: Qintessence Publishing; 2002.
[11]	Ha SR. Biomechanical three-dimensional finite element analysis of monolithic zirconia crown with different cement type. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015; 7(6): 475-83.
[12]	Ushiwata O, de Moraes JV. Method for marginal measurements of restorations: accessory device for toolmakers microscope. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83(3): 362-6.
[13]	Rojpaibool T, Leevailoj C. Fracture Resistance of Lithium Disilicate Ceramics Bonded to Enamel or Dentin Using Different Resin Cement Types and Film Thicknesses. J Prosthodont. 2017; 26(2): 141-149.
[14]	Holsinger DM, Wells MH, Scarbecz M, Donaldson M. Clinical Evaluation and Parental Satisfaction with Pediatric Zirconia Anterior Crowns. Pediatr Dent. 2016; 38(3): 192-197.
[15]	Zaruba M, Mehl A. Chairside systems: a current review. Int J Comput Dent. 2017; 20(2): 123-149.
[16]	Qualtrough AJ, Piddock V. Ceramics update. J Dent. 1997; 25(2): 91-95.
[17]	Kamposiora P, Papavasiliou G, Bayne SC, Felton DA. Predictions of cement microfracture under crowns using 3D-FEA. J Prosthodont. 2000 Dec; 9(4): 201-209.
[18]	Nakamura K, Mouhat M, Nergård JM, Lægreid SJ, Kanno T, Milleding P, Örtengren U. Effect of cements on fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia crowns. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2016; 2(1): 12-19.
[19]	Hussien I M, Ibraheem A F. The effect of differentmarginal cement space thickness on the fracture strength of monolithic zirconia crowns using different luting agents. J res med dent sci. 2020; 10(04): 48-52.
[20]	D’Addazio G, Santilli M, Rollo M L., Cardelli P, Rexhepi I, Murmura G, Al-Haj Husain N, Sinjari B, Traini T, Özcan M, Caputi S. Fracture resistance of Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic crowns cemented with conventional or adhesive systems: An in vitro study. Materials. 2020; 13(9): 2012.
[21]	Pengpue P, Sirimaharaj V, Chaijareenont P, Chinadet W. Tensile bond strength between paediatric prefabricated zirconia crowns and primary maxillary incisors when using various types of luting cements: an in vitro study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2024; 25(4): 471-479.
[22]	Srinivasan SR, Mathew MG, Jayaraman J. Comparison of Three Luting Cements for Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Primary Molar Teeth: a 36-month Randomized Clinical Trial. Pediatr Dent. 2023; 45(2): 117-124.
[23]	Walia T, Brigi C, Ziadkhani MM, Khayat AA, Tabibzadeh Z. Retention Force of Glass Ionomer Based Luting Cements with Posterior Primary Zirconium Crowns - A Comparative in Vitro Study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2021; 45(4): 259-264.
[24]	Alrashdi M, Alhunti A. Clinical Outcome of Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns Cemented with Self-Adhesive Resin and Pure Glass Ionomer on Primary Teeth: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Children (Basel). 2024; 11(8): 991.
[25]	Sahin I, Karayilmaz H, Çiftçi ZZ, Kirzioglu Z. Fracture Resistance of Prefabricated Primary Zirconium Crowns Cemented with Different Luting Cements. Pediatr Dent. 2018; 40(7): 443-448.
[26]	Zekiye EFE, Güçlü ZA. In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. Bezmialem Science 2021; 9(2): 177-184.
[27]	Maroulakos G, Thompson GA, Kontogiorgos ED. Effect of cement type on the clinical performance and complications of zirconia and lithium disilicate tooth-supported crowns: A systematic review. Report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 121(5): 754-765.
[28]	Alrashdi M, Ardoin J, Liu JA. Zirconia crowns for children: A systematic review. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2022; 32(1): 66-81.
[29]	Gressler May L, Kelly JR, Bottino MA, Hill T. Influence of the resin cement thickness on the fatigue failure loads of CAD/CAM feldspathic crowns. Dent Mater. 2015; 31(8): 895-900.
[30]	Prakki A, Cilli R, Da Costa AU, Gonçalves SE, Mondelli RF, Pereira JC. Effect of resin luting film thickness on fracture resistance of a ceramic cemented to dentin. J Prosthodont. 2007; 16(3): 172-178.
[31]	Venturini AB, Wandscher VF, Marchionatti AME, Evangelisti E, Ramos GF, Melo RM, May LG, Baldissara P, Valandro LF. Effect of resin cement space on the fatigue behavior of bonded CAD/CAM leucite ceramic crowns. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2020; 110: 103893.
[32]	Liu B, Lu C, Wu Y, Zhang X, Arola D, Zhang D. The effects of adhesive type and thickness on stress distribution in molars restored with all-ceramic crowns. J Prosthodont. 2011; 20(1): 35-44.
[33]	Owais AI, Shaweesh M, Abu Alhaija ES. Maximum occusal bite force for children in different dentition stages. Eur J Orthod. 2013; 35(4): 427-433.