HOME OF DENTAL PRODUCTS REPORT • DENTAL LAB PRODUCTS • MODERN HYGIENIST
    • Homepage
    • Products
    • Clinical 360°
    • Enterprise 360°
    • Practice Mgmt
    • Tech Guide
    • Fee Survey
    • Homepage
    • Products
    • CAD/CAM Connection
    • Business News
    • DLP Guides
    • Homepage
    • Products
    • Careers
    • Dental
    • Lab
    • Hygiene
    • Education
    • Services
    • Podcasts
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Video Demonstrations
    • Clinical Research
    • Continuing Education
Products
Products Our Site All Dental Sites
Contact Us | Subscribe | Advertise | RSS
Login
Printer Friendly
Email Article
New Articles
  • 1.Norbert Duepner named NBC CDT of the year
  • 2.LSU hosts Laserdenta
  • 3.TCS launches new Web site
  • 4.TCS offers TCS Unbreakable Advanced Workshop
  • 5.Is my business a target for burglary?
  • 6.First, impressions
  • 7.Nobel Biocare signs preferred partner agreement with VITA
  • 8.Chicago Midwinter condenses to three days
  • 9.NBC launches home-based Modularization Program
  • 10.Gil Villavecer new VP at Vident

Printer Friendly Email Article


The Study Design

This study involved 10 different combinations of framework materials and veneer ceramics. There were five zirconia, two alumina, and three PFM combinations. To mimic clinical reality, 116 dentists with a variety of backgrounds and abilities were asked to participate. Each dentist invited at least two patients in need of a 3-unit posterior prosthesis, including a molar pontic, to participate. Each CAD/CAM manufacturer selected two dental laboratories in the United States to fabricate 16 each of the restoration type. The companies could not use in-house labs for the study. The test products were randomly assigned to the dentist/patient combination, and the cases were randomly assigned to each manufacturer’s two laboratories. The dentist/patient and laboratory were blinded to each other using a coding system, which allowed the lab to know which incoming cases were part of the study. All patients are recalled yearly for evaluation of their prosthesis, both clinically and scientifically. Scanning electron microscope, clinical images, and special high-resolution gold-sputtered dies provide the major sources of the data and documentation of the condition of each prosthesis at each yearly recall.

Study conclusion:

At two years, zirconia and metal frameworks performed equally well with no breaks. Alumina had a 26% breakage, which indicates a high risk in posterior multi-unit restorations. Veneer ceramics pressed to zirconia and metal had significantly fewer defects than layered ceramics. At this point, veneer ceramics designed for zirconia need close clinical observation with an eye to improvement in formulation and handling.

Labs participating in the study:

Bay View Laboratory, Chesapeake, Va.

Da Vinci Dental Studies, West Hill, Calif.

Lord's Dental Studio, DePere, Wis.

Nakanishi Dental Laboratory, Bellevue, Wash.

Arrowhead Dental Laboratory, Sandy, Utah

Fort Washington, Fort Washington, Penn.

Blue West Dental Laboratory, El Dorado Hills, Calif.

Jason Kim Dental Laboratory, Great Neck, NY.

Dental Crafters, Marshfield, Wis.

Stanely Okon Dental Laboratory, Laguna Woods, Calif.

Esthetic Dental Arts, Albuquerque, NM.

Dental South, Gainesville, Ga.

Glidewell Laboratories, Newport Beach, Calif. 


Companies and products in this study 
Zirconia substructure with two year-dataZirconia substructures with one-year dataAlumina substructureMetal substructure

Cercon by Dentsply Prosthetics.

Ceramic: CeramcoPFZ

Fabrication:Layered

 


Everest by KaVo

Ceramic: CZR Press

Fabrication: Pressed 

Wol-Ceram with layered

porcelain by XPdent

Ceramic: Cerabien

Fabrication: Layered

 

Captek by Precious

Metals Inc.

Ceramic: Creation

Fabrication: Layered

 

Everest by KaVo

Ceramic: Initial ZR

Fabrication: Layered




IPS e.max by Ivoclar Vivadent

Ceramic: e.max ZirPress.

Fabrication: Pressed

Wol-Ceram with pressed porcelain, experimental, by Glidewell Laboratories

Ceramic: Cerabien

Fabrication: Pressed



 

Ceramco3 by Dentsply Prosthetics

Ceramic: SoftWear Enamels

Fabrication: Layered

 

Lava by 3M ESPE

Ceramic: LavaCeram

Fabrication: Layered

 

  

Pulse Interface by Jensen

Ceramic: Pulse Interface

Fabrication: Pressed

 

 


 




WEB EXCLUSIVE

More photos and graphs that illustrate results from the survey. 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 


 


 



4 of 4
BROWSE BY CATEGORY
All-Ceramics CAD/CAM CE/Training Cosmetic Digital Radiography Endodontics Equipment Hygiene Implants Infection Control Lab Equip./Supplies Lasers Materials Operatory Furniture Operatory Supplies Orthodontics Patient Education Periodontics Pharmaceuticals Practice Management Restoratives Cone Beam Whitening Technology Instrumentation
Home | Dental | Lab | Hygiene | Videos | Contact Us | Advertise | Subscribe | CE | Podcasts | Surveys | Events |
Copyright © 2008 Advanstar Dental Media | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Linking & RSS Policy