The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제11권1호
  • /
  • Pages.23-31
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Two-body wear behavior of human enamel versus monolithic zirconia, lithium disilicate, ceramometal and composite resin

  • 투고 : 2018.05.13
  • 심사 : 2019.01.21
  • 발행 : 2019.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. To investigate and compare the surface roughness (SR), weight and height of monolithic zirconia (MZ), ceramometal (CM), lithium disilicate glass ceramic (LD), composite resin (CR), and their antagonistic human teeth enamel. MATERIALS AND METHODS. 32 disc shaped specimens for the four test materials (n=8) and 32 premolars were prepared and randomly divided. SR, weight and height of the materials and the antagonist enamel were recorded before and after subjecting the specimens to 240,000 wear-cycles ($49N/0.8Hz/5^{\circ}C/50^{\circ}C$). SR, height, weight, and digital microscopic qualitative evaluation were measured. RESULTS. CM ($0.23+0.08{\mu}m$) and LD ($0.68+0.16{\mu}m$) exhibited the least and highest mean difference in the SR, respectively. ANOVA revealed significance (P=.001) between the materials for the SR. Paired T-Test showed significance (P<.05) for the pre- and post- SR for all the materials. For the antagonistic enamel, no significance (P=.987) was found between the groups. However, the pre- and post- SR values of all the enamel groups were significant (P<.05). Wear cycles had significant effect on enamel weight loss against all the materials (P<.05). CR and MZ showed the lowest and highest height loss of 0.14 mm and 0.46 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION. MZ and CM are more resistant to SR against the enamel than LD and CR. Enamel worn against test materials showed similar SR. Significant variations in SR values for the tested materials (MZ, LD, CM, and CR) against the enamel were found. Wear simulation significantly affected the enamel weight loss against all the materials, and enamel antagonist against MZ and CM showed more height loss.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Lucas PW, Omar R, Al-Fadhalah K, Almusallam AS, Henry AG, Michael S, Thai LA, Watzke J, Strait DS, Atkins AG. Mechanisms and causes of wear in tooth enamel: implications for hominin diets. J R Soc Interface 2013;10:20120923. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2012.0923
  2. Xia J, Zheng J, Huang D, Tian ZR, Chen L, Zhou Z, Ungar PS, Qian L. New model to explain tooth wear with implications for microwear formation and diet reconstruction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2015;112:10669-72. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509491112
  3. Mundhe K, Jain V, Pruthi G, Shah N. Clinical study to evaluate the wear of natural enamel antagonist to zirconia and metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:358-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.03.001
  4. Clelland NL, Agarwala V, Knobloch LA, Seghi RR. Wear of enamel opposing low-fusing and conventional ceramic restorative materials. J Prosthodont 2001;10:8-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2001.00008.x
  5. Heintze SD, Cavalleri A, Forjanic M, Zellweger G, Rousson V. Wear of ceramic and antagonist-a systematic evaluation of influencing factors in vitro. Dent Mater 2008;24:433-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.016
  6. Wang L, Liu Y, Si W, Feng H, Tao Y, Ma Z. Friction and wear behaviors of dental ceramics against natural tooth enamel. J Eur Ceram Soc 2012;32:2599-606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2012.03.021
  7. Sripetchdanond J, Leevailoj C. Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1141-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.006
  8. Zandparsa R, El Huni RM, Hirayama H, Johnson MI. Effect of different dental ceramic systems on the wear of human enamel: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:230-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.005
  9. Shimane T, Endo K, Zheng JH, Yanagi T, Ohno H. Wear of opposing teeth by posterior composite resins-evaluation of newly developed wear test methods. Dent Mater J 2010;29: 713-20. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2008-031
  10. Yesil ZD, Alapati S, Johnston W, Seghi RR. Evaluation of the wear resistance of new nanocomposite resin restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:435-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60105-5
  11. Bartlett D, Varma S. A retrospective audit of the outcome of composites used to restore worn teeth. Br Dent J 2017;223: 33-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.583
  12. Borgia E, Baron R, Borgia JL. Quality and survival of direct light-activated composite resin restorations in posterior teeth: A 5- to 20-year retrospective longitudinal study. J Prosthodont 2017 May 17.
  13. Ho TK, Satterthwaite JD, Silikas N. The effect of chewing simulation on surface roughness of resin composite when opposed by zirconia ceramic and lithium disilicate ceramic. Dent Mater 2018;34:e15-e24.
  14. Denry I, Holloway JA. Ceramics for dental applications: A review. Materials 2010;3:351-68. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma3010351
  15. Araujo NS, Moda MD, Silva EA, Zavanelli AC, Mazaro JV, Pellizzer EP. Survival of all-ceramic restorations after a minimum follow-up of five years: A systematic review. Quintessence Int 2016;47:395-405.
  16. Ren L, Zhang Y. Sliding contact fracture of dental ceramics: Principles and validation. Acta Biomater 2014;10:3243-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.03.004
  17. Arsecularatne JA, Chung NR, Hoffman M. An in vitro study of the wear behaviour of dental composites. Biosurf Biotribol 2016;2:102-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bsbt.2016.09.002
  18. Zhao X, Pan J, Zhang S, Malmstrom HS, Ren YF. Effectiveness of resin-based materials against erosive and abrasive enamel wear. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:463-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1814-3
  19. Fischer TE, Anderson MP, Jahanmir S. Influence of fracture toughness on the wear resistance of yttria-doped zirconium oxide. J Am Ceram Soc 1989;72:252-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1989.tb06110.x
  20. Mitov G, Heintze SD, Walz S, Woll K, Muecklich F, Pospiech P. Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures. Dent Mater 2012;28:909-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.010
  21. Mormann WH, Stawarczyk B, Ender A, Sener B, Attin T, Mehl A. Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2013;20:113-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.003
  22. Rosentritt M, Preis V, Behr M, Hahnel S, Handel G, Kolbeck C. Two-body wear of dental porcelain and substructure oxide ceramics. Clin Oral Investig 2012;16:935-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0589-9
  23. Stawarczyk B, Ozcan M, Schmutz F, Trottmann A, Roos M, Hammerle CH. Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists. Acta Odontol Scand 2013;71:102-12. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2011.654248
  24. Stawarczyk B, Frevert K, Ender A, Roos M, Sener B, Wimmer T. Comparison of four monolithic zirconia materials with conventional ones: Contrast ratio, grain size, four-point flexural strength and two-body wear. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2016;59:128-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.11.040
  25. Mitov G, Heintze SD, Walz S, Woll K, Muecklich F, Pospiech P. Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures. Dent Mater 2012;28:909-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.010
  26. Janyavula S, Lawson N, Cakir D, Beck P, Ramp LC, Burgess JO. The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:22-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60005-0
  27. Heintze SD. How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods. Dent Mater 2006;22:712-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.02.002
  28. Preis V, Behr M, Kolbeck C, Hahnel S, Handel G, Rosentritt M. Wear performance of substructure ceramics and veneering porcelains. Dent Mater 2011;27:796-804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.04.001
  29. Rosentritt M, Behr M, van der Zel JM, Feilzer AJ. Approach for valuating the influence of laboratory simulation. Dent Mater 2009;25:348-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.08.009
  30. Hahnel S, Behr M, Handel G, Rosentritt M. Two-body wear of artificial acrylic and composite resin teeth in relation to antagonist material. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:269-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60051-2
  31. Etman MK, Woolford M, Dunne S. Quantitative measurement of tooth and ceramic wear: in vivo study. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:245-52.
  32. Esquivel-Upshaw J, Rose W, Oliveira E, Yang M, Clark AE, Anusavice K. Randomized, controlled clinical trial of bilayer ceramic and metal-ceramic crown performance. J Prosthodont 2013;22:166-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00913.x
  33. Passos SP, Torrealba Y, Major P, Linke B, Flores-Mir C, Nychka JA. In vitro wear behavior of zirconia opposing enamel: a systematic review. J Prosthodont 2014;23:593-601. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12167
  34. Lohbauer U, Reich S. Antagonist wear of monolithic zirconia crowns after 2 years. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:1165-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1872-6
  35. Chun KJ, Lee JY. Comparative study of mechanical properties of dental restorative materials and dental hard tissues in compressive loads. J Dent Biomech 2014;5:1758736014555246.
  36. Hmaidouch R, Weigl P. Tooth wear against ceramic crowns in posterior region: a systematic literature review. Int J Oral Sci 2013;5:183-90. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijos.2013.73
  37. Zhang YR, Du W, Zhou XD, Yu HY. Review of research on the mechanical properties of the human tooth. Int J Oral Sci 2014;6:61-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijos.2014.21
  38. Vieira AC, Oliveira MC, Lima EM, Rambob I, Leite M. Evaluation of the surface roughness in dental ceramics submitted to different finishing and polishing methods. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2013;13:290-5.

피인용 문헌

  1. Monolithic Zirconia: An Update to Current Knowledge. Optical Properties, Wear, and Clinical Performance vol.7, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7030090
  2. In Vitro Simulation and In Vivo Assessment of Tooth Wear: A Meta-Analysis of In Vitro and Clinical Research vol.12, pp.21, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12213575
  3. The color stability and wear resistance of provisional implant restorations: A prospective clinical study vol.6, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.311
  4. Effect of Finishing and Polishing on The Surface Roughness of Bulk Fill Composites vol.15, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210602115010025