Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of thickness and incisal extension of indirect veneers on the biomechanical behavior of maxillary canine teeth

  • Costa, Victoria Luswarghi Souza (Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Tribst, Joao Paulo Mendes (Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Uemura, Eduardo Shigueyuki (Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • de Morais, Dayana Campanelli (Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto (Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Science and Technology)
  • Received : 2018.07.04
  • Accepted : 2018.10.27
  • Published : 2018.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze the influence of thickness and incisal extension of indirect veneers on the stress and strain generated in maxillary canine teeth. Materials and Methods: A 3-dimensional maxillary canine model was validated with an in vitro strain gauge and exported to computer-assisted engineering software. Materials were considered homogeneous, isotropic, and elastic. Each canine tooth was then subjected to a 0.3 and 0.8 mm reduction on the facial surface, in preparations with and without incisal covering, and restored with a lithium disilicate veneer. A 50 N load was applied at $45^{\circ}$ to the long axis of the tooth, on the incisal third of the palatal surface of the crown. Results: The results showed a mean of $218.16{\mu}strain$ of stress in the in vitro experiment, and $210.63{\mu}strain$ in finite element analysis (FEA). The stress concentration on prepared teeth was higher at the palatal root surface, with a mean value of 11.02 MPa and varying less than 3% between the preparation designs. The veneers concentrated higher stresses at the incisal third of the facial surface, with a mean of 3.88 MPa and a 40% increase in less-thick veneers. The incisal cover generated a new stress concentration area, with values over 48.18 MPa. Conclusions: The mathematical model for a maxillary canine tooth was validated using FEA. The thickness (0.3 or 0.8 mm) and the incisal covering showed no difference for the tooth structure. However, the incisal covering was harmful for the veneer, of which the greatest thickness was beneficial.

Keywords

References

  1. Schmidt KK, Chiayabutr Y, Phillips KM, Kois JC. Influence of preparation design and existing condition of tooth structure on load to failure of ceramic laminate veneers. J Prosthet Dent 2011;105:374-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60077-2
  2. Korkut B, Yanikoglu F, Gunday M. Direct composite laminate veneers: three case reports. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospect 2013;7:105-111.
  3. Re D, Augusti G, Amato M, Riva G, Augusti D. Esthetic rehabilitation of anterior teeth with laminates composite veneers. Case Rep Dent 2014;2014:849273.
  4. Magne P, Hanna J, Magne M. The case for moderate "guided prep" indirect porcelain veneers in the anterior dentition. The pendulum of porcelain veneer preparations: from almost no-prep to over-prep to no-prep. Eur J Esthet Dent 2013;8:376-388.
  5. Schmitz JH, Cortellini D, Granata S, Valenti M. Monolithic lithium disilicate complete single crowns with feather-edge preparation design in the posterior region: a multicentric retrospective study up to 12 years. Quintessence Int 2017;20:601-608.
  6. Edelhoff D, Sorensen JA. Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:503-509. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.124094
  7. Ozturk E, Bolay S. Survival of porcelain laminate veneers with different degrees of dentin exposure: 2-year clinical results. J Adhes Dent 2014;16:481-489.
  8. Stappert CF, Ozden U, Gerds T, Strub JR. Longevity and failure load of ceramic veneers with different preparation designs after exposure to masticatory simulation. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94:132-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.05.023
  9. Andreasen FM, Daugaard-Jensen J, Munksgaard EC. Reinforcement of bonded crown fractured incisors with porcelain veneers. Endod Dent Traumatol 1991;7:78-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1991.tb00189.x
  10. Spitznagel FA, Boldt J, Gierthmuehlen PC. CAD/CAM ceramic restorative materials for natural teeth. J Dent Res 2018;97:1082-1091. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034518779759
  11. Lien W, Roberts HW, Platt JA, Vandewalle KS, Hill TJ, Chu TM. Microstructural evolution and physical behavior of a lithium disilicate glass-ceramic. Dent Mater 2015;31:928-940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.05.003
  12. Alkadi L, Ruse ND. Fracture toughness of two lithium disilicate dental glass ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:591-596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.02.009
  13. De Araujo EM Jr, Fortkamp S, Baratieri LN. Closure of diastema and gingival recontouring using direct adhesive restorations: a case report. J Esthet Restor Dent 2009;21:229-240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00267.x
  14. Haralur SB. Microleakage of porcelain laminate veneers cemented with different bonding techniques. J Clin Exp Dent 2018;10:e166-e171.
  15. Pini NP, Aguiar FH, Lima DA, Lovadino JR, Terada RS, Pascotto RC. Advances in dental veneers: materials, applications, and techniques. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2012;4:9-16. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S7837
  16. Dal Piva AMO, Tribst JPM, Borges ALS, Souza ROAE, Bottino MA. CAD-FEA modeling and analysis of different full crown monolithic restorations. Dent Mater 2018;34:1342-1350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.06.024
  17. Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, Madruga CFL, Valera MC, Borges ALS, Bresciani E, de Melo RM. Endocrown restorations: influence of dental remnant and restorative material on stress distribution. Dent Mater 2018;34:1466-1473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.06.012
  18. Zarone F, Apicella D, Sorrentino R, Ferro V, Aversa R, Apicella A. Influence of tooth preparation design on the stress distribution in maxillary central incisors restored by means of alumina porcelain veneers: a 3D-finite element analysis. Dent Mater 2005;21:1178-1188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.02.014
  19. Chaiyabutr Y, Phillips KM, Ma PS, Chitswe K. Comparison of load-fatigue testing of ceramic veneers with two different preparation designs. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22:573-575.
  20. Guess PC, Stappert CF. Midterm results of a 5-year prospective clinical investigation of extended ceramic veneers. Dent Mater 2008;24:804-813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.09.009
  21. Tribst JPM, Rodrigues VA, Borges ALS, Lima DR, Nishioka RS. Validation of a simplified implant-retained cantilever fixed prosthesis. Implant Dent 2018;27:49-55. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000761
  22. Tribst JP, Rodrigues VA, Dal Piva AO, Borges AL, Nishioka RS. The importance of correct implants positioning and masticatory load direction on a fixed prosthesis. J Clin Exp Dent 2018;10:e81-e87.
  23. Datte CE, Tribst JP, Dal Piva AO, Nishioka RS, Bottino MA, Evangelhista AM, Monteiro FM, Borges AL. Influence of different restorative materials on the stress distribution in dental implants. J Clin Exp Dent 2018;10:e439-e444.
  24. Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, Shibli JA, Borges ALS, Tango RN. Influence of implantoplasty on stress distribution of exposed implants at different bone insertion levels. Braz Oral Res 2017;31:e96.
  25. Monteiro JB, Dal Piva AMO, Tribst JPM, Borges ALS, Tango RN. The effect of resection angle on stress distribution after root-end surgery. Iran Endod J 2018;13:188-194.
  26. Souza AC, Xavier TA, Platt JA, Borges AL. Effect of base and inlay restorative material on the stress distribution and fracture resistance of weakened premolars. Oper Dent 2015;40:E158-E166. https://doi.org/10.2341/14-229-L
  27. Eser A, Akca K, Eckert S, Cehreli MC. Nonlinear finite element analysis versus ex vivo strain gauge measurements on immediately loaded implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:439-446.
  28. Kheiralla LS, Younis JF. Peri-implant biomechanical responses to standard, short-wide, and mini implants supporting single crowns under axial and off-axial loading (an in vitro study). J Oral Implantol 2014;40:42-52. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00102
  29. Bicalho AA, Valdivia AD, Barreto BC, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A, Soares CJ. Incremental filling technique and composite material--part II: shrinkage and shrinkage stresses. Oper Dent 2014;39:E83-E92. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-442-L
  30. Chang Y, Tambe AA, Maeda Y, Wada M, Gonda T. Finite element analysis of dental implants with validation: to what extent can we expect the model to predict biological phenomena? A literature review and proposal for classification of a validation process. Int J Implant Dent 2018;4:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-018-0119-5
  31. Richter WA, Ueno H. Relationship of crown margin placement to gingival inflammation. J Prosthet Dent 1973;30:156-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(73)90050-4
  32. Hui KK, Williams B, Davis EH, Holt RD. A comparative assessment of the strengths of porcelain veneers for incisor teeth dependent on their design characteristics. Br Dent J 1991;171:51-55. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4807602
  33. Highton R, Caputo AA, Matyas J. A photoelastic study of stresses on porcelain laminate preparations. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:157-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(87)90168-5
  34. Meijering AC, Creugers NH, Roeters FJ, Mulder J. Survival of three types of veneer restorations in a clinical trial: a 2.5-year interim evaluation. J Dent 1998;26:563-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00032-8
  35. Ge C, Green CC, Sederstrom D, McLaren EA, White SN. Effect of porcelain and enamel thickness on porcelain veneer failure loads in vitro. J Prosthet Dent 2014;111:380-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.09.025
  36. Kelly JR. Clinically relevant approach to failure testing of all-ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:652-661. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70103-4
  37. De Boever JA, McCall WD Jr, Holden S, Ash MM Jr. Functional occlusal forces: an investigation by telemetry. J Prosthet Dent 1978;40:326-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(78)90042-2
  38. Gibbs CH, Mahan PE, Mauderli A, Lundeen HC, Walsh EK. Limits of human bite strength. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:226-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90480-4

Cited by

  1. Effect of the restorative technique on load-bearing capacity, cusp deflection, and stress distribution of endodontically-treated premolars with MOD restoration vol.44, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2019.44.e33
  2. Lithium Disilicate Crown, Zirconia Hybrid Abutment and Platform Switching to Improve the Esthetics in Anterior Region: A Case Report vol.12, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.2147/ccide.s234980
  3. Effect of three different veneering techniques on the stress distribution and in vitro fatigue behavior of core-veneer all-ceramic fixed partial dentures vol.15, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.2021.032