Document Type




Format of Original

7 p.

Publication Date




Source Publication

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Source ISSN


Original Item ID

DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.02.014; PubMed Central: PMID: 27157600


Statement of problem

Two novel restorative materials, a polymer infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) and a resin nanoceramic (RNC), for computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD-CAM) applications have recently become commercially available. Little independent evidence regarding their mechanical properties exists to facilitate material selection.


The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the edge chipping resistance and flexural strength of the PICN and RNC materials and compare them with 2 commonly used feldspathic ceramic (FC) and leucite reinforced glass-ceramic (LRGC) CAD-CAM materials that share the same clinical indications.

Material and methods

PICN, RNC, FC, and LRGC material specimens were obtained by sectioning commercially available CAD-CAM blocks. Edge chipping test specimens (n=20/material) were adhesively attached to a resin substrate before testing. Edge chips were produced using a 120-degree, sharp, conical diamond indenter mounted on a universal testing machine and positioned 0.1 to 0.7 mm horizontally from the specimen’s edge. The chipping force was plotted against distance to the edge, and the data were fitted to linear and quadratic equations. One-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05) in edge chipping toughness. Beam specimens (n=22/material) were tested for determining flexural strength using a 3-point bend test. Weibull statistics determined intergroup differences (α=.05). Flexural modulus and work of fracture were also calculated, and 1-way ANOVA determined intergroup differences (α=.05)


Significant (PLRGC=FC>PICN; flexural strength: RNC=LRGC>PICN>FC; flexural modulus: RNCLRGC=PICN>FC.


The RNC material demonstrated superior performance for the mechanical properties tested compared with the other 3 materials.


Accepted version. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, Vol. 116, No. 3 (September 2016): 397-403. DOI. © 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Used with permission.

Included in

Dentistry Commons