This study evaluates screw access hole effects on fracture resistance in translucent zirconia crowns, suggesting preparation techniques matter.
This study evaluated the effects of screw hole and preparation techniques on the fracture resistance of implant-supported translucent zirconia crowns after mechanical cycling. Forty crowns were divided into four groups of 10: CNH (cement-retained with no screw access hole) for the control, HBS (hole prepared before dense sintering), HAS (hole manually prepared after sintering), and HRS (hole manually prepared undergo resintered). All crowns survived 360,000 cycles with a peak force of 300 N at 10 Hz. Fracture resistance assessments indicated that the HBS technique exhibited the highest resistance, with CNS demonstrating the lowest. However, statistical analyses (Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests) revealed no significant differences between them. SEM fractographic analysis indicated that screw hole preparation techniques could influence fracture patterns and failure initiation in zirconia crowns.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zheng et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: