Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Strength of Implant Supported Crown Fabricated from CAD/CAM and 3D Printed Resin Matrix Ceramic

Objective: To compare fracture strength of screw-retained implant-supported crown of resin matrix ceramic when fabricated using CAD/CAM and 3D printing Material and method: vericom Mazic® Duro (CAD/CAM Nano Hybrid Ceramic) was used as particle-filled composite CAD/CAM material, saremco Print Crowntec (3D printable resins-based) as 3D printed composite material, and the control group was composed of IPS e.max. ZirCAD ivoclar vivadent (zirconia) was used to fabricate mandibular first molar screw-retained, implant-supported crowns. After the fabrication, the crowns were cemented with the Rely X U200 self-adhesive resin cement (3M ESPE, Germany) on stock abutments tightened to analogs embedded in acrylic resin. Finally, all crowns were subjected to a fracture resistance test. fracture strength was evaluated by using one–way ANOVA with Chi-square used for the association between the modes of fracture. Result: The results showed that there were significant differences between all the groups used, the control group (Group zirconia) was significantly higher, as the mean was equal to 6391 N. Followed by Group vericom (cad/cam) with a mean of 2558 N, then Group seramco (3D printing) with a mean of 817.92 N. Dunnett T3 test showed statistically significant differences in fracture resistance between the three groups. There was no significant difference between the modes of fracture and the methods. Conclusion: Screw-retained implant-supported crowns manufactured by CAD/CAM technique had better fracture resistance value than those of the 3D printed technique. Clinical Relevance: resin matrix ceramic is a possible substitute for zirconia in an implant-supported crown