In vitro comparison of fracture load of implant-supported, zirconia-based, porcelain- and composite-layered restorations after artificial aging

This study evaluated fracture load of single-tooth, implant-supported, zirconia-based, porcelain- and indirect composite-layered restorations after artificial aging. Forty-four zirconia-based molar restorations were fabricated on implant abutments and divided into four groups, namely, zirconia-based all-ceramic restorations (ZAC group) and three types of zirconia-based composite-layered restorations (ZIC-P, ZIC-E, and ZIC groups). Before layering an indirect composite material, the zirconia copings in the ZIC-P and ZIC-E groups were primed with Clearfil Photo Bond and Estenia Opaque Primer, respectively. All restorations were cemented on the abutments with glass-ionomer cement and then subjected to thermal cycling and cyclic loading. All specimens survived thermal cycling and cyclic loading. The fracture load of the ZIC-P group (2.72 kN) was not significantly different from that of the ZAC group (3.05 kN). The fracture load of the zirconia-based composite-layered restoration primed with Clearfil Photo Bond (ZIC-P) was comparable to that of the zirconia-based all-ceramic restoration (ZAC) after artificial aging.