This work investigates the critical plastic strain variation with stress triaxiality and the Lode angle parameter for an Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS)-based proprietary blend compound (commercial name VeroWhitePlus™ RGD835) manufactured through photopolymerization. Various triaxial states of stress and Lode angles were obtained with the help of notched flat specimens used in tensile loadings, notched round specimens used in compression (upsetting) tests and butterfly specimens used in Arcan tests. The tests were replicated using finite element analyses in order to evaluate the aforementioned parameters.

In this article, the yielding and plastic flow of a rapid-prototyped ABS compound was investigated for various plane stress states. The experimental procedures consisted of multiaxial tests performed on an Arcan device on specimens manufactured through photopolymerization. Numerical analyses were employed in order to determine the yield points for each stress state configuration. The results were used for the calibration of the Hosford yield criterion and flow potential. Numerical analyses performed on identical specimen models and test configurations yielded results that are in accordance with the experimental data.

Objective: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the influence of cervical margin design—tangential versus chamfer—on the fracture resistance of monolithic crowns fabricated from lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramics. Materials and Methods: Forty extracted human molars were randomly assigned to two preparation types: chamfer and tangential. Each group was restored with CAD/CAM-fabricated crowns made from either zirconia (IPS e.max^® ZirCAD Prime) or lithium disilicate (IPS e.max^® CAD), resulting in four subgroups (n = 10). Standardized adhesive cementation protocols were applied. After 24 h storage in distilled water, the specimens underwent static load-to-failure testing using a ZwickRoell ProLine Z005 universal testing machine. Results: Zirconia crowns with chamfer margins exhibited the highest mean fracture resistance (2658 N), while lithium disilicate crowns with tangential margins showed the lowest (1862 N). Chamfer preparation significantly increased the fracture resistance of lithium disilicate crowns (p < 0.01), whereas margin design had no significant effect on zirconia. All restorations exceeded physiological masticatory forces, confirming their clinical viability. Conclusions: Cervical margin design significantly affected the fracture performance of lithium disilicate crowns but not zirconia. Chamfer preparations are recommended when using lithium disilicate to optimize mechanical strength. These findings underscore the importance of preparation geometry in guiding material selection for CAD/CAM ceramic restorations.

All-ceramic restorations are the foundation of modern esthetic dentistry. Clinical approaches for preparation, durability, aesthetics, and repair have been reformed by the idea of adhesive dentistry. The aim of the study and the objective question was to evaluate the impact of heated hydrofluoric acid pretreatment and the application technique’s influence on the surface morphology and roughness of leucite-reinforced glass–ceramic materials (IPS Empress CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent), which is fundamental for understanding the adhesive cementation process. Scanning electron microscopy was used to observe the effectiveness of the two HF (Yellow Porcelain Etch, Cerkamed) application techniques and the HF’s temperature impact on the surface topography of the ceramic. Based on surface conditioning methods, the adhesive cement (Panavia V5, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc., Tokyo, Japan) was applied to the conditioned ceramic samples and light-cured. Shear bond strength values were correlated with the micro-retentive surface texture of the ceramic. With universal testing equipment at a 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed, SBS values between the resin cement and the ceramic material were assessed until failure. Analyzing the fractured surfaces of the specimens by digital microscopy, the failure modes were divided into three categories: adhesive, cohesive, and mixed failure. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to statistically analyze the collected data. The results show that alternative treatment methods affected the material’s surface characteristics and have an influence on the shear bond strength.

Aim: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the adhesive performance of zirconia and lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations on prepared and non-prepared anterior abutment teeth. While conventional clinical protocols involve abutment tooth preparation, no-preparation (no-prep) restorations have emerged as a viable, minimally invasive alternative. This study compared the adhesion fracture resistance (N) of zirconia restorations on non-prepared enamel surfaces with those on prepared surfaces exposing the dentin. Additionally, the zirconia restorations were compared with lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations, a more common yet costly alternative. Materials and Methods: Forty extracted anterior teeth were allocated into four groups based on preparation type (prepared vs. non-prepared) and material (zirconia vs. lithium disilicate). Each group received cantilevered single-unit FPDs fabricated via CAD/CAM and adhesively cemented using Variolink^® Esthetic DC. Standardized loading was applied using a universal testing machine, and the fracture resistance was recorded. Results: The fracture resistance ranged from 190 to 447 N in the zirconia groups and from 219 to 412 N in the lithium disilicate groups. When comparing all the zirconia versus all the lithium disilicate ceramic restorations, regardless of tooth preparation, no statistically significant difference was found (p = 0.752). However, the non-prepared restorations exhibited significantly higher fracture resistance than their prepared counterparts (p = 0.004 for zirconia; p = 0.012 for lithium disilicate ceramic). All the failures were attributed to tooth fracture, except one zirconia restoration, with no debonding observed. Conclusions: Both zirconia and lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations demonstrated reliable adhesive performance when bonded using appropriate surface conditioning and adhesive protocols. Interestingly, the non-prepared designs exhibited higher fracture resistance than the prepared abutments, highlighting their potential advantage in minimally invasive restorative dentistry. Zirconia Maryland bridges, in particular, represent a cost-effective and mechanically resilient option for anterior single-tooth replacement.