Minimally invasive CAD/CAM lithium disilicate partial-coverage restorations show superior in-vitro fatigue performance than single crowns

Objective: To analyze the influence of restoration design (partial-coverage restoration vs. crown) and ceramic layer thickness on the performance and failure loads of CAD/CAM-fabricated lithium disilicate (LDS) reconstructions on molars after fatigue.Materials and Methods: Seventy-two posterior monolithic CAD/CAM-fabricated LDS restorations (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) with different occlusal/buccal ceramic layer thicknesses (1.5/0.8, 1.0/0.6, and 0.5/0.4 mm) and restoration designs (PCR: non-retentive full-veneer/partial-coverage restoration, C: crown,) were investigated and divided into six groups (n = 12, test: PCR-1.5, PCR-1.0, PCR-0.5; control: C-1.5, C-1.0, C-0.5). LDS restorations were adhesively bonded (Variolink Esthetic DC, Ivoclar Vivadent) to dentin-analogue composite dies (Z100, 3M ESPE). All specimens were subjected to thermomechanical loading (1.2 million cycles, 49 N, 1.6 Hz, 5-55 degrees C) and exposed to single load to failure testing. Failure analysis was performed with light and scanning electron microscopies. Data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA, Tukey-Test, and t-test (p < 0.05).Results: Eight crown samples (C-0.5) and one PCR specimen (PCR-0.5) revealed cracks after fatigue, resulting in an overall success rate of 87.5% (crowns: 75%, PCRs: 96.88%). Direct comparisons of PCRs versus crowns for thicknesses of 0.5 mm (p < 0.001) and 1.0 mm (p = 0.004) were significant and in favor of PCRs. Minimally invasive PCRs (0.5 and 1.0 mm) outperformed crowns with the identical ceramic thickness. No difference was detected (p = 0.276) between thickness 1.5 mm PCRs and crowns.Conclusions: Minimally invasive monolithic CAD/CAM-fabricated posterior LDS PCRs (0.5 and 1.0 mm) resulted in superior failure load values compared to minimally invasive crowns. Minimally invasive crowns (0.5 mm) are prone to cracks after fatigue.