e.max CAD
CadCAM Milled Crystalized Lithium Disilicate
360
Esthetic anterior & premolar crowns
Lithium Disilicate e.max Press
Pressed Lithium Disilicate
e.max ZirCAD
CadCAM Milled Sintered 1,000 Zirconia Yttrium Zirconia
Strong esthetic crown & bridge frames throughout the mouth
e.max ZirPress
Pressed Fluorapatite Glass 110
Esthetic press to zirconia esthetic anterior laminates
e.max Ceram
Layered Fluorapatite Glass
400
90
Esthetic crowns premolar & anterior bridges
Layering all e.max materials
IPS e.max Lithium Disilicate
IPS e.max Press Lithium disilicate glass ceramic High flexural strength 400 MPa 16 A-D, 4 Bleach BL shades – LT and HT Adhesive or conventional cementation Fabricated through traditional press technique for superb fit and ease of production
IPS e.max Press Indications Anterior and posterior full-contour crowns Implant superstructures Veneers 3-unit anterior bridges Inlays/Onlays Thin Veneers
IPS e.max Press Thin Veneer IPS e.max Press can be used for the fabrication of very thin veneers (minimal Prep). If sufficient space is available, e.g. retrusion of a tooth, no preparation is required. IPS e.max Veneers are not just for “no-prep“ but the right prep. The following minimum thicknesses for fabricating thin veneers have to be observed:
labial
incisal
0.3 mm
0.4 mm
Advantages • • •
Higher edge strength vs. traditional glass ceramic materials (can be finished thinner without chipping) Low viscosity of heated ingot enables pressing to very thin dimension (minimal prep or no-prep veneers) Chameleon effect due to higher translucency
IPS e.max Press Thin Veneer Please observe the following procedures for the fabrication of thin veneers: Apply the spacer to the preparation or tooth to be treated according to the veneer preparation guidelines For thin veneers without preparation, locate the restoration margins in the proximal area as well as along the gingival margin. Observe the minimum thickness of the veneer. Sprue, invest, press, divest and remove the reaction layer according to the stipulations It is possible to apply IPS e.max Ceram Incisal or Transpa. Conduct the Stain and Glaze firing with IPS e.max Ceram. Thin veneers have to be adhesively cemented.
Material Properties
Flexural Strength 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Felds
Pressed Leucite
Lithium
Aluminum
Zirconia
PFM
Flexural Strength 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Felds
Pressed Leucite
Lithium
Aluminum
Zirconia
PFM
Flexural Strength 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Felds
Pressed Leucite
Lithium
Aluminum
Zirconia
PFM
Flexural Strength 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Felds
Pressed Leucite
Lithium
Aluminum
Zirconia
PFM
Flexural Strength 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Felds
Pressed Leucite
Lithium
Aluminum
Zirconia
Monolithic vs. Zirconia Monolithic Lithium Disilicate Crown
Zirconia Crown
90 MPa
1000 MPa 360 – 400 MPa
Lithium Disilicate – Glass Ceramic for Press
Flexural strength:
400 MPa
CTE (100-400°C): 10.5 ·10-6 K-1 Press temperature:
920° C
Thin Veneer
Wax-up
Pressing Quality
Fitting Quality
Fitting Quality high mechanical stability
Material Thickness
temperature stability Stain / Glaze process
stone die
natural color die
Translucency Effect
Opalescence Effect
Standard Prep
Cross Section 10x magnification
Cross Section 30x magnification
Minimal Prep
Cross Section 10x magnification
Cross Section 30x magnification
No Prep (using feldspathic materials)
Cross Section 10x magnification
Cross Section 30x magnification
No Prep (using lithium disilicate)
Cross Section 10x magnification
Cross Section 30x magnification
Feldspathic Veneer (Foil Technique)
Feldspathic Veneer (Refractory Technique)
IPS e.max Press Veneer
Minimal and No-prep Veneers
Good arch form and axial contours for using a no-prep approach. Dark triangles at cervical embrasures can be easily closed without creating unsanitary contours
IPS e.max Press HT Veneer
IPS e.max Press HT Veneer
IPS e.max Press HT Veneer
IPS e.max Press HT Veneer
IPS e.max Press HT Veneer
IPS e.max Press HT Veneer
`
Bonding and Thickness Effect on Fracture Load of CAD/CAM Crowns
Question asked How does thickness and cementation affect the load that a e.max CAD restoration can take? Objective To measure the fracture load of CAD/CAM lithium disilicate glass-ceramic crowns (e.maxCAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.) milled with two thicknesses and cemented either conventionally (Vivaglass CEM, Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.) or adhesively (Multilink Automix, Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.).
Thickness and Cementation Groups Four groups were used for this study: (1) (2) (3) (4)
Standard thickness and conventional cementation Reduced thickness and conventional cementation Standard thickness and adhesive cementation Reduced thickness and adhesive cementation.
Load to Failure was measured Standard Thickness
Reduced Thickness
Fifteen specimens were produced for each group. A standardized molar crown was scanned using the Cerec InLab (Sirona). Thirty crowns were designed with thicknesses exceeding the minimal dimensions for e.maxCAD material (Standard thickness). Thirty more crowns were milled with the thickness reduced internally by 0.6 mm. The occlusal morphology was the same for all the crowns. The specimens were then fired and glazed in one firing according to the manufacturer’s instructions in a P500 Programat oven (Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.).
Load to Failure was measured •The crowns were cemented to composite (Heliomolar, Ivoclar Vivadent) preparations which were formed from the internal surface of each crown using either a conventional cement (VivaglassCEM) or an adhesive cement (Multilink Automix) and stored in water for 24 h at 37°C. The crowns were loaded using a 15 mm diameter steel ball at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min with an Instron Universal Testing machine until a crack was produced.
3500
Failure Load (N)
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 e.maxCAD standard conventional
e.maxCAD reduced conventional
e.maxCAD e.maxCAD EmpressCAD standard adhesive reduced adhesive standard adhesive
Thickness and Cementation Type
Effect of Thickness and Cement Type
Conclusion Within this study, increased thickness and adhesive cementation greatly increased the failure load of CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns.
`
Cementation Effect on the Fracture Load of Two CAD/CAM Materials
Question asked How does cementation affect the failure load for e.max CAD and zirconia core restorations? Objective To measure the fracture load of CAD/CAM lithium disilicate glass-ceramic crowns (e.maxCAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.) and zirconia core (Lava core, Lave Ceram 3M/ESPE) cemented either conventionally (Zinc Phosphate, Fleck’s) or adhesively (Multilink Automix, Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.).
Thickness and Cementation Groups Four groups were used for this study: (1) e.max CAD LT full contour and conventional cementation (2) zirconia core/veneered and conventional cementation (3) e.max CAD LT full contour and adhesive cementation (4) zirconia core/veneered and adhesive cementation.
Load to Failure was measured •Ten specimens were produced for each group. A standardized molar crown was scanned using the Cerec InLab (Sirona). Twenty crowns were designed with recommended dimensions for lithium-disilicate material. The specimens were fired and glazed according to the manufacturer’s instructions in a P500 Programat oven (Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.). Twenty copings with proper support were milled in zirconia using the Lava system. These copings were layered in a matrix to full anatomy. The occlusal morphology was the same for all the crowns in the study. All crowns were cemented to composite (Heliomolar, Ivoclar Vivadent) preparations which were formed from the internal surface of each crown using either conventional cementation (Fleck’s Zinc Phosphate) or adhesive cementation (Multilink Automix) and stored in water for 24 h at 37°C. The crowns were loaded using a 15 mm diameter steel ball at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min with an Instron Universal Testing machine.
Mean breaking load [N]
crown crunch test 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Multilink Automix
Fleck's Cement
lava zirconia lava zirconia
Multilink Automix
Fleck's Cement
e.max CAD
e.max CAD
Conclusion
Within this study, adhesive cementation increased the failure load of CAD/CAM crowns, though no statistical difference was found between the crown materials.
IPS e.max Lithium Disilicate Wear
Testing Equipment • Oral Wear Simulator 2000
Strength vs. Wear