Objective: This investigation compares the impact strength of a resin nano ceramic, hybrid dental ceramic, leucite reinforced glass-ceramic, lithium-disilicate glass ceramic and microfiller reinforced polyacrylic material.
Method: Impact strength of a material indicates the absorbed energy of a material during fracture. Impact strength of Lava Ultimate (3M ESPE), VITA Enamic (VITA Zahnfabrik),
... [Show full abstract] IPS Empress CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent), IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent) and VITA CAD-Temp (VITA Zahnfabrik) was measured in accordance to EN-ISO 179-1:2010. The measurement was performed on flexural strength bars (10mm x 3mm x 16mm; at least n = 5 for each material) in a 3-point-bending geometry (span width = 12mm). Materials were prepared according their instructions for use and surfaces were polished to a specific surface roughness. The measurement was done on an impact strength tester (Fa. Zwick/Roell) consisting a pendulum of 0.5 Joule. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's t-test (p<0.05).
Result: The table shows the mean impact strength values and standard deviation in kJ/m² for all tested materials. Letters indicate groups that are not statistically different.
Material
Material class
Impact strength with standard deviation in kJ/m².
Lava Ultimate
Resin nano ceramic
7.54 +- 1.62 (A)
Vita Enamic
Hybrid dental ceramic
2.13 +- 0.20 (B)
Empress CAD
Leucite reinforced glass-ceramic
1.38 +- 0.32 (B)
IPS e.max CAD
Lithium-disilicate glass ceramic
2.34 +- 0.78 (B)
Vita CAD Temp
Microfiller Reinforced Polyacrylic
1.60 +- 0.12 (B)
Conclusion: Within this investigation LAVA Ultimate showed statistical significant higher impact strength than IPS e.max CAD, Empress CAD, Vita Enamic and Vita CAD Temp.