Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the flexural strength of 8 CAD/CAM materials.
Method: Ten bars, 15 mm x 3.5 mm x 1.5 mm, were made of 2 provisional restorative materials, CAD-temp (Vita) (group 1) and Telio CAD (Ivoclar) (group 2); 2 feldspathic ceramic materials, Mark II (Vita) (group 3) and ProCAD (Ivoclar) (group 4); 2 glass ceramic materials, e.max CAD (Ivoclar) (group 5) and Empress CAD (Ivoclar) (group 6); 1 resin-based composite material, MZ100 (3M ESPE) (group 7); and an experimental resin nano-ceramic material (3M ESPE) (group 8). Bars were cut from CAD/CAM blocks with a saw (Isomet; Buehler), and were tested with a 3-point bending test in a universal testing machine (5566A, Instron) with a 1-kN cell, a 0.5mm/min cross-head speed and a 10-mm span. Results were analyzed with ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test (α=0.05).
Result: Means and standard deviations of flexural strength values (MPa) were: (group 1) 102.09±5.07; (group 2) 181.49±7.99; (group 3) 95.58±9.09; (group 4) 373.82±63.09; (group 5) 88.01±35.28; (group 6) 103.26±16.19; (group 7) 183.09±22.69 and (group 8) 233.91±12.19. The e.max CAD material recorded a significantly higher mean flexural than all other materials. The resin nano-ceramic material recorded the second highest strength. There was no statistically significant difference between the MZ100 and Telio CAD materials, and no statistically significant differences among ProCAD, CAD-temp, Mark II and Empress CAD materials.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that the experimental material demonstrated the second highest mean value for flexural strength. MZ100 and Telio Cad recorded higher flexural strengths than some ceramic materials.
Keywords: CAD/CAM, Dental materials and Resin nano-ceramic
See more of: Dental Materials 7: Polymer-based Materials-Physical Properties and Performance