Pressed Ceramic Restorations vs. Feldspathic Porcelain: What is Better?

Anon asks:
What is a ‘pressed ceramic’ restoration? How is this different from feldspathic porcelain? I keep hearing lecturers voice their support for one of these kinds of porcelain but I do not understand what is so important? Is one more aesthetic than the other? Is one stronger than the other? Are there specific indications for each of these different kinds of porcelain? Should I be choosing one of these for certain kinds of ceramic restorations? Would my lab know about the difference?

8 thoughts on “Pressed Ceramic Restorations vs. Feldspathic Porcelain: What is Better?

  1. Pressed ceramic is a material like Empress – it is cast in a mold. It has the advantage of being very accurate as far as fit. It is also kinder to the opposing dentition than feldspathic porcelain. But I don’t believe it is more esthetic. Some clinicians do beautiful work with Empress and other pressed ceramics. But they is more translucent, and the color is on the surface, so to me it doesn’t have the depth of a traditional feldspathic restoration. They also aren’t good for cases where the patient wants a “ballistic white” smile — super-white or bleached white, because of the difficulty of getting the translucent pressed ceramic to that very white shade.

  2. The terminology is a bit misleading, because nearly any porcelain can be formed into a pellet and pressed. What is generally referred to as “feldspathic” is in fact, “refractory” porcelain. In other words, one is made from a wax pattern that is invested, burned out, and cast using a pressing pellet that is heated to a plastic state and injected.

    The other is made by layering the material onto a refractory model and fired in a porcelain furnace. The “pressed” restorations are generally considered to be denser, and hence stronger, where a layered of “Refractory” restoration has more internal character and a very good fit.

    Each has it’s advantages over the other. A solid armamentarium includes both.

  3. “Ballistic White” I like that.

    Just for the record, there are thousands of pellets on the market with many degrees of translucency or opacity, and even gradient pellets that have layers of color built in. The old Empress rules don’t apply. FYI.

  4. Restorations also can be started pressed or CAD/CAM and then layered to finish. (Zirconium cores are all done that way.)
    I remember when Empress II came out, but don’t see it anymore…

  5. Is a Cerec restoration filling considered a porcelain material or a composite filling material?

    Is it considered a plastic composite filling type of material or a porcelain type of material?

  6. Briefly :ceramics are materials composed of double salts of sodium -pottassium aluminium silicates.In ceramics(its a broad term meaning incuding industrial Ceramics )compounds containing predominantly Na are termed feldspathic.This is a term basically denoting the compositional properties.,however pressable ceramics are/ is a term used for using(processing)a particular form of ceramic – which can be feldspathic but is generally glass-particle.

  7. The question is , is there pressed veneeering ceramics technique over zircoina framworks. is there any article written about it.

  8. Amoori – To my understanding, and someone can correct me if I am wrong, I believe that if a Zirconia framework is all Zirconia, then ceramic (porcelain) can be pressed over the zirconia framework and fired in a porcelain oven, even stained and re-fired if needed. The reason it has to be all Zirconia framework is that if it is a metal fused to zirconia framework, during the porcelain firing, the zirconia may fracture at the interface where it meets the meatal, due to expansion from heat. I am sure if you contacted someone like Attachments International, or 3i, where they do these custom type all zirconia/ceramic restorations, one of them may be able to explain it more clearly.

Comments are closed.