Chulalongkorn University Dental Journal

Publication Date



Objective This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of enamel-boned ceramic with variations in cement and ceramic thickness. Materials and methods Leucite-reinforced and lithium-disilicate porcelain laminates (0.5 and 1 mm thick) were fabricated and cemented to human enamel using bonding agent and resin cement with the thicknesses of 30 and 100 μm. Non-cemented porcelain laminate was used as control. Fracture load (Newton) was obtained by pressing a 2 mm-diameter indenter rod against ceramic until the laminates fractured. Independent t-tests were used to compare mean fracture loads (MFL). Results The results obtained from both type of ceramic were in the same trend. No difference in MFL between two test groups was found between 0.5 mm laminate groups (leucite-reinforced ceramic: 30 μm-771.56 ± 107.35; 100 μm-810.06 ± 110.26; lithium-disilicate ceramic: 30 μm-2471.81 ± 339.52; 100 μm-2666.58 ± 245.15). On the other hand, when laminate thickness was 1 mm, MFL of 30 μm group was significantly higher than that of 100 μm group (leucite-reinforced ceramic: 30 μm-2666.20 ± 220.46; 100 μm-1748.39 ± 245.24; lithium-disilicate ceramic: 30 μm-3547.38 ± 310.30; 100 μm- 2622.17 ± 256.99). Conclusion The effect of cement thickness was clearly observed when the thickness of porcelain laminate was 1 mm. An increase in cement thickness from 30 to 100 μm could significantly decrease the enamel-bonded ceramic strength. When the thickness of porcelain laminate was 0.5 mm, no significant effect of cement thickness was observed.



First Page


Last Page


Included in

Dentistry Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.