The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Simulated occlusal adjustments and their effects on zirconia and antagonist artificial enamel

  • Received : 2018.09.05
  • Accepted : 2019.06.11
  • Published : 2019.06.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of occlusal adjustments on the surface roughness of yttria-tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP) and wear of opposing artificial enamel. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty-five Y-TZP slabs from each brand (Lava, 3M and Bruxzir, Glidewell Laboratories) with different surface conditions (Control polished - CPZ; Polished/ground - GRZ; Polished/ground/repolished - RPZ; Glazed - GZ; Porcelain-veneered - PVZ; n=5) were abraded (500,000 cycles, 80 N) against artificial enamel (6 mm diameter steatite). Y-TZP roughness (in ${\mu}m$) before and after chewing simulation (CS) and antagonist steatite volume loss (in $mm^3$) were evaluated using a contact surface profilometer. Y-TZP roughness was analyzed by three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and steatite wear by two-way ANOVA and Tukey Honest Difference (HSD) (P=.05). RESULTS. There was no effect of Y-TZP brand on surface roughness (P=.216) and steatite loss (P=.064). A significant interaction effect (P<.001) between surface condition and CS on Y-TZP roughness was observed. GZ specimens showed higher roughness after CS (before CS - $3.7{\pm}1.8{\mu}m$; after CS - $13.54{\pm}3.11{\mu}m$), with partial removal of the glaze layer. Indenters abraded against CPZ ($0.09{\pm}0.03mm^3$) were worn more than those abraded against PVZ ($0.02{\pm}0.01mm^3$) and GZ ($0.02{\pm}0.01mm^3$). Higher wear caused by direct abrasion against zirconia was confirmed by SEM. CONCLUSION. Polishing with an intraoral polishing system did not reduce the roughness of zirconia. Wear of the opposing artificial enamel was affected by the material on the surface rather than the finishing technique applied, indicating that polished zirconia is more deleterious to artificial enamel than are glazed and porcelain-veneered restorations.

Keywords

References

  1. Tuncel I, Eroglu E, Sari T, Usumez A. The effect of coloring liquids on the translucency of zirconia framework. J Adv Prosthodont 2013;5:448-51. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2013.5.4.448
  2. Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Gueth JF, Edelhoff D, Naumann M. In vitro performance of full-contour zirconia single crowns. Dent Mater 2012;28:449-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.024
  3. Alghazzawi TF, Janowski GM. Correlation of flexural strength of coupons versus strength of crowns fabricated with different zirconia materials with and without aging. J Am Dent Assoc 2015;146:904-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2015.06.006
  4. Guess PC, Kulis A, Witkowski S, Wolkewitz M, Zhang Y, Strub JR. Shear bond strengths between different zirconia cores and veneering ceramics and their susceptibility to thermocycling. Dent Mater 2008;24:1556-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.03.028
  5. Long HA. Monolithic zirconia crowns and bridges. Inside Dent 2012;8:60-6.
  6. 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
  7. Tong H, Tanaka CB, Kaizer MR, Zhang Y. Characterization of three commercial Y-TZP ceramics produced for their high-translucency, high-strength and high-surface area. Ceram Int 2016;42:1077-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.09.033
  8. Johansson C, Kmet G, Rivera J, Larsson C, Vult Von Steyern P. Fracture strength of monolithic all-ceramic crowns made of high translucent yttrium oxide-stabilized zirconium dioxide compared to porcelain-veneered crowns and lithium disilicate crowns. Acta Odontol Scand 2014;72:145-53. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2013.822098
  9. Kontos L, Schille C, Schweizer E, Geis-Gerstorfer J. Influence of surface treatment on the wear of solid zirconia. Acta Odontol Scand 2013;71:482-7. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.696690
  10. Tholt de Vasconcellos B, Miranda-Junior WG, Prioli R, Thompson J, Oda M. Surface roughness in ceramics with different finishing techniques using atomic force microscope and profilometer. Oper Dent 2006;31:442-9. https://doi.org/10.2341/05-54
  11. Raigrodski AJ. Concepts of design for contemporary anterior all-ceramic restorations. J Cosme Dent 2013;28:46-58.
  12. Sorrentino R, De Simone G, Tete S, Russo S, Zarone F. Fiveyear prospective clinical study of posterior three-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Investig 2012;16:977-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0575-2
  13. Candido L, Fais L, Reis JMdSN, Pinelli L. Surface roughness and hardness of yttria stabilized zirconia (Y-TZP) after 10 years of simulated brushing. Rev Odontol UNESP 2014;43:379-83. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-2577.1049
  14. Kwon MS, Oh SY, Cho SA. Two-body wear comparison of zirconia crown, gold crown, and enamel against zirconia. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2015;47:21-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.11.029
  15. Albashaireh ZS, Ghazal M, Kern M. Two-body wear of different ceramic materials opposed to zirconia ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104:105-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60102-3
  16. 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
  17. Ghazal M, Kern M. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:342-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60068-8
  18. Stober T, Bermejo JL, Rammelsberg P, Schmitter M. Enamel wear caused by monolithic zirconia crowns after 6 months of clinical use. J Oral Rehabil 2014;41:314-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12139
  19. Preis V, Weiser F, Handel G, Rosentritt M. Wear performance of monolithic dental ceramics with different surface treatments. Quintessence Int 2013;44:393-405.
  20. Preis V, Behr M, Handel G, Schneider-Feyrer S, Hahnel S, Rosentritt M. Wear performance of dental ceramics after grinding and polishing treatments. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2012;10:13-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2012.03.002
  21. Rashid H. The effect of surface roughness on ceramics used in dentistry: A review of literature. Eur J Dent 2014;8:571-9. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.143646
  22. Etman MK. Confocal examination of subsurface cracking in ceramic materials. J Prosthodont 2009;18:550-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00447.x
  23. Lawson NC, Janyavula S, Syklawer S, McLaren EA, Burgess JO. Wear of enamel opposing zirconia and lithium disilicate after adjustment, polishing and glazing. J Dent 2014;42:1586-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.09.008
  24. Jung YS, Lee JW, Choi YJ, Ahn JS, Shin SW, Huh JB. A study on the in-vitro wear of the natural tooth structure by opposing zirconia or dental porcelain. J Adv Prosthodont 2010;2:111-5. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2010.2.3.111
  25. Luangruangrong P, Cook NB, Sabrah AH, Hara AT, Bottino MC. Influence of full-contour zirconia surface roughness on wear of glass-ceramics. J Prosthodont 2014;23:198-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12088
  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. Steiner M, Mitsias ME, Ludwig K, Kern M. In vitro evaluation of a mechanical testing chewing simulator. Dent Mater 2009;25:494-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.09.010
  28. Kim MJ, Oh SH, Kim JH, Ju SW, Seo DG, Jun SH, Ahn JS, Ryu JJ. Wear evaluation of the human enamel opposing different Y-TZP dental ceramics and other porcelains. J Dent 2012;40:979-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.08.004
  29. Kelly JR. Clinically relevant approach to failure testing of allceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:652-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70103-4
  30. DeLong R, Douglas WH, Sakaguchi RL, Pintado MR. The wear of dental porcelain in an artificial mouth. Dent Mater 1986;2:214-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(86)80016-1
  31. Magne P, Oh WS, Pintado MR, DeLong R. Wear of enamel and veneering ceramics after laboratory and chairside finishing procedures. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:669-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70008-9
  32. Shortall AC, Hu XQ, Marquis PM. Potential countersample materials for in vitro simulation wear testing. Dent Mater 2002;18:246-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00043-4
  33. Hmaidouch R, Muller WD, Lauer HC, Weigl P. Surface roughness of zirconia for full-contour crowns after clinically simulated grinding and polishing. Int J Oral Sci 2014;6:241-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijos.2014.34
  34. Ablal MA, Kaur JS, Cooper L, Jarad FD, Milosevic A, Higham SM, Preston AJ. The erosive potential of some alcopops using bovine enamel: an in vitro study. J Dent 2009;37:835-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.06.016
  35. Lameira DP, Buarque e Silva WA, Andrade e Silva F, De Souza GM. Fracture strength of aged monolithic and bilayer zirconia-based crowns. Biomed Res Int 2015;2015:418641.
  36. Ludovichetti FS, Trindade FZ, Werner A, Kleverlaan CJ, Fonseca RG. Wear resistance and abrasiveness of CAD-CAM monolithic materials. J Prosthet Dent 2018;120:318.e1-e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.011
  37. Pereira GKR, Guilardi LF, Dapieve KS, Kleverlaan CJ, Rippe MP, Valandro LF. Mechanical reliability, fatigue strength and survival analysis of new polycrystalline translucent zirconia ceramics for monolithic restorations. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2018;85:57-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.05.029
  38. Barghi N, Alexander L, Draughn RA. When to glaze - An electron microscope study. J Prosthet Dent 1976;35:648-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(76)90322-X
  39. Roselino Lde M, Cruvinel DR, Chinelatti MA, Pires-de-Souza Fde C. Effect of brushing and accelerated ageing on color stability and surface roughness of composites. J Dent 2013;41:e54-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.07.005
  40. Tortopidis D, Lyons MF, Baxendale RH, Gilmour WH. The variability of bite force measurement between sessions, in different positions within the dental arch. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25:681-6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1998.00293.x
  41. Aydin B, Pamir T, Baltaci A, Orman MN, Turk T. Effect of storage solutions on microhardness of crown enamel and dentin. Eur J Dent 2015;9:262-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.156848
  42. Camposilvan E, Leone R, Gremillard L, Sorrentino R, Zarone F, Ferrari M, Chevalier J. Aging resistance, mechanical properties and translucency of different yttria-stabilized zirconia ceramics for monolithic dental crown applications. Dent Mater 2018;34:879-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.03.006
  43. Pinto PA, Colas G, Filleter T, De Souza GM. Surface and mechanical characterization of dental yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystals (3Y-TZP) after different aging processes. Microsc Microanal 2016;22:1179-88. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927616011843