{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.047462096242584045, 'fraction_numerical': 0.025049439683586024, 'mean_word_length': 4.861003861003861, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Flexural strength of minimum thickness ceramic veneers manufactured with different techniques.

OBJECTIVE
The objective of the present study was to assess the effect of monolithic and bilayer restorations considering heat-pressed and milled/CAD/CAM reinforced lithium disilicate ceramic veneers, on the flexural strength after cementation.


METHOD AND MATERIALS
Thirty-five specimens were divided into five groups (n = 7), according to the restorative solution: 2-mm thickness composite resin (CR2); heat-pressed monolithic ceramic 0.6 mm (HPM), CAD/CAM monolithic ceramics 0.6 mm (CCM); heat-pressed monolithic ceramic 0.4 mm + 0.2 mm glass-ceramic (HPB); CAD/CAM monolithic ceramic 0.4 mm + 0.2 glass-ceramic (CCB). Specimens were cemented on composite resin bars and submitted to a three-point bending test on a Universal Testing Machine, until fracture. Fractured samples were analyzed under stereomicroscope and SEM. Flexural strength data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey test.


RESULTS
The control group showed the highest flexural strength results (119.57 ± 19.49 MPa), with values similar to groups HPM (98 ± 25.62 MPa) and CCM (96.14 ± 20.60 MPa). Groups HPB and CCB showed lower values when compared with the other groups. Fracture started from the base on monolithic groups and from ceramic on bilayer groups.


CONCLUSION
Both ceramic systems (CAD/CAM and heat-pressed) have similar fracture strength, although bilayer restorations present lower strength when compared with monolithic ceramics.