The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of intaglio surface trueness, wear, and fracture resistance of zirconia crown under simulated mastication: a comparative analysis between subtractive and additive manufacturing

  • Kim, Yong-Kyu (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Han, Jung-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yoon, Hyung-In (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2022.01.15
  • Accepted : 2022.03.17
  • Published : 2022.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This in-vitro analysis aimed to compare the intaglio trueness, the antagonist's wear volume loss, and fracture load of various single-unit zirconia prostheses fabricated by different manufacturing techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Zirconia crowns were prepared into four different groups (n = 14 per group) according to the manufacturing techniques and generations of the materials. The intaglio surface trueness (root-mean-square estimates, RMS) of the crown was measured at the marginal, axial, occlusal, and inner surface areas. Half of the specimens were artificially aged in the chewing simulator with 120,000 cycles, and the antagonist's volume loss after aging was calculated. The fracture load for each crown group was measured before and after hydrothermal aging. The intaglio trueness was evaluated with Welch's ANOVA and the antagonist's volume loss was assessed by the Kruskal-Wallis tests. The effects of manufacturing and aging on the fracture resistance of the tested zirconia crowns were determined by two-way ANOVA. RESULTS. The trueness analysis of the crown intaglio surfaces showed surface deviation (RMS) within 50 ㎛, regardless of the manufacturing methods (P = .053). After simulated mastication, no significant differences in the volume loss of the antagonists were observed among the zirconia groups (P = .946). The manufacturing methods and simulated chewing had statistically significant effects on the fracture resistance (P < .001). CONCLUSION. The intaglio surface trueness, fracture resistance, and antagonist's wear volume of the additively manufactured 3Y-TZP crown were clinically acceptable, as compared with those of the 4Y- or 5Y-PSZ crowns produced by subtractive milling.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The biospecimens and data used for this study were provided by the Biobank of Seoul National University Dental Hospital, a member of the Korea Biobank Network (KBN4_A04).

References

  1. Gautam C, Joyner J, Gautam A, Rao J, Vajtai R. Zirconia based dental ceramics: structure, mechanical properties, biocompatibility and applications. Dalton Trans 2016;45:19194-215. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6dt03484e
  2. Denry I, Kelly JR. State of the art of zirconia for dental applications. Dent Mater 2008;24:299-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.05.007
  3. Stawarczyk B, Keul C, Eichberger M, Figge D, Edelhoff D, Lumkemann N. Three generations of zirconia: From veneered to monolithic. Part II. Quintessence Int 2017;48:441-50.
  4. Kolakarnprasert N, Kaizer MR, Kim DK, Zhang Y. New multi-layered zirconias: Composition, microstructure and translucency. Dent Mater 2019;35:797-806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2019.02.017
  5. Malkondu O, Tinastepe N, Akan E, Kazazoglu E. An overview of monolithic zirconia in dentistry. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 2016;30:644-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/13102818.2016.1177470
  6. Abduo J, Lyons K, Swain M. Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2010;37:866-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02113.x
  7. Att W, Komine F, Gerds T, Strub JR. Marginal adaptation of three different zirconium dioxide three-unit fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:239-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60047-0
  8. van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 2012;28:3-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.10.014
  9. Schriwer C, Skjold A, Gjerdet NR, Oilo M. Monolithic zirconia dental crowns. Internal fit, margin quality, fracture mode and load at fracture. Dent Mater 2017;33:1012-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.06.009
  10. Strub JR, Rekow ED, Witkowski S. Computer-aided design and fabrication of dental restorations: current systems and future possibilities. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:1289-96. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0389
  11. Khanlar LN, Salazar Rios A, Tahmaseb A, Zandinejad A. Additive manufacturing of zirconia ceramic and its application in clinical dentistry: a review. Dent J (Basel) 2021;9:104.
  12. Torabi K, Farjood E, Hamedani S. Rapid prototyping technologies and their applications in prosthodontics, a review of literature. J Dent (Shiraz) 2015;16:1-9.
  13. Schwentenwein M, Homa J. Additive manufacturing of dense alumina ceramics. Int J Appl Ceram Technol 2014;12:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.12319
  14. Ebert J, Ozkol E, Zeichner A, Uibel K, Weiss O, Koops U, Telle R, Fischer H. Direct inkjet printing of dental prostheses made of zirconia. J Dent Res 2009;88:673-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034509339988
  15. Wang W, Sun J. Dimensional accuracy and clinical adaptation of ceramic crowns fabricated with the stereolithography technique. J Prosthet Dent 2021;125:657-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.02.032
  16. Wang W, Yu H, Liu Y, Jiang X, Gao B. Trueness analysis of zirconia crowns fabricated with 3-dimensional printing. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:285-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.04.012
  17. Li R, Chen H, Wang Y, Sun Y. Performance of stereolithography and milling in fabricating monolithic zirconia crowns with different finish line designs. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2021;115:104255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104255
  18. Lerner H, Nagy K, Pranno N, Zarone F, Admakin O, Mangano F. Trueness and precision of 3D-printed versus milled monolithic zirconia crowns: An in vitro study. J Dent 2021;113:103792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103792
  19. Revilla-Leon M, Methani MM, Morton D, Zandinejad A. Internal and marginal discrepancies associated with stereolithography (SLA) additively manufactured zirconia crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:730-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.09.018
  20. Revilla-Leon M, Al-Haj Husain N, Ceballos L, Ozcan M. Flexural strength and Weibull characteristics of stereolithography additive manufactured versus milled zirconia. J Prosthet Dent 2021;125:685-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.01.019
  21. Ioannidis A, Bomze D, Hammerle CHF, Husler J, Birrer O, Muhlemann S. Load-bearing capacity of CAD/CAM 3D-printed zirconia, CAD/CAM milled zirconia, and heat-pressed lithium disilicate ultra-thin occlusal veneers on molars. Dent Mater 2020;36:109-16.
  22. DeLong R, Douglas WH. An artificial oral environment for testing dental materials. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1991;38:339-45. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.133228
  23. 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
  24. Kirsch C, Ender A, Attin T, Mehl A. Trueness of four different milling procedures used in dental CAD/CAM systems. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:551-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1916-y
  25. Dikova T, Dzhendov DA, Ivanov D, Bliznakova K. Dimensional accuracy and surface roughness of polymeric dental bridges produced by different 3D printing processes. Arch Mater Sci Eng 2018;94:65-75.
  26. Choi JW, Bae IH, Noh TH, Ju SW, Lee TK, Ahn JS, Jeong TS, Huh JB. Wear of primary teeth caused by opposed all-ceramic or stainless steel crowns. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:43-52. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.1.43
  27. Oh WS, Delong R, Anusavice KJ. Factors affecting enamel and ceramic wear: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:451-9. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.123851
  28. 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
  29. Kohorst P, Borchers L, Strempel J, Stiesch M, Hassel T, Bach FW, Hubsch C. Low-temperature degradation of different zirconia ceramics for dental applications. Acta Biomater 2012;8:1213-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2011.11.016
  30. Lumkemann N, Stawarczyk B. Impact of hydrothermal aging on the light transmittance and flexural strength of colored yttria-stabilized zirconia materials of different formulations. J Prosthet Dent 2021;125:518-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.01.016
  31. 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
  32. Wei C, Gong X, Xie C, Chen ZX, Li SB, Gremillard L. In vitro cyclic fatigue and hydro-thermal aging lifetime assessment of yttria-stabilized zirconia dental ceramics. J Eur Ceram Soc 2020;40:4647-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2020.04.016