Mechanical Properties of Five Esthetic Ceramic Materials Used for Monolithic Restorations: A Comparative In Vitro Study

Abstract

Monolithic zirconia and hybrid ceramic restorations have been widely used in the last decade for both anterior and posterior dental restorations. However, their use lacks sufficient scientific evidence in most cases, as the expeditious manufacturing of these versatile ceramic materials exceeds the limits of in vitro and/or in vivo validation. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the mechanical properties (flexural strength, fracture toughness, Vickers hardness, and brittleness index) of three CAD-CAM monolithic multilayer zirconia ceramics (GNX—Ceramill Zolid® Gen-X, ZCP—IPS e.max® ZirCAD, and UPC—Upcera® Esthetic Explore Prime) and one CAD-CAM monolithic multilayer polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic (ENM—Vita® Enamic) with a CAD-CAM monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic as a control (EMX —IPS e.max® CAD). A total of 160 discs (GNX = 32, ZCP = 32, UPC = 32, ENM = 32, and EMX = 32) were cut, polished, and fully sintered (except for the ENM). Half of the samples for each group were subjected to hydrothermal aging. Descriptive analysis and ANOVA tests were used to compare the groups. The zirconia groups showed significantly higher mechanical properties than the EMX group for both the non-aged and aged samples (p < 0.05). The ENM group showed the lowest brittleness index, while EMX showed the highest. The mechanical properties of monolithic multilayer zirconia ceramics were generally better than those of monolithic multilayer polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic and lithium disilicate ceramic. All groups showed, to some extent, a change in their mechanical properties after aging, with the ENM being the most affected.

Keywords

• aging
• brittleness
• flexural strength
• hardness
• lithium disilicate
• mechanical properties