Surface Roughness of Monolithic and Layered Zirconia Restorations at Different Stages of Finishing and Polishing: An In Vitro Study

被引:17
|
作者
Al Hamad, Khaled Q. [1 ]
Abu Al-Addous, Ahmad M. [1 ]
Al-Wahadni, Ahed M. [1 ]
Baba, Nadim Z. [2 ]
Goodacre, Brian J. [3 ]
机构
[1] Jordan Univ Sci & Technol, Dept Prosthodont, Irbid, Jordan
[2] Loma Linda Univ, Sch Dent, Adv Specialty Educ Program Prosthodont, Loma Linda, CA 92350 USA
[3] Loma Linda Univ, Sch Dent, Div Gen Dent, Loma Linda, CA 92350 USA
关键词
CAD; CAM; ceramics; finishing glazing; layered; monolithic; polishing; roughness; surface roughness; zirconia; CLINICAL SUCCESS; PORCELAIN; CERAMICS; SYSTEMS; TRANSFORMATION; STRENGTH; COPINGS; CROWNS; KITS;
D O I
10.1111/jopr.13071
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose To evaluate surface roughness and topography of different zirconia-based restorations at various steps of finishing and polishing. Materials and Methods Seventy-five zirconia discs were fabricated and divided into 3 layered and 2 monolithic groups: layered conventional (VM9; Vita), layered pressed (PM9; Vita), layered digital (TriLuxe Forte; Vita), opaque monolithic (Ceramill Zi; Amann Girrbach), and translucent monolithic (Zolid FX; Amann Girrbach). Surface roughness testing (Ra, Rz) and scanning electron microscopy were performed at the glazed, unglazed, finished, polished, super-polished, and super-polished with diamond paste steps. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis. Results There were significant differences in all groups among the different steps (p < 0.001, F = 77.67 for layered conventional; p < 0.001, F = 133.90 for layered pressed; p < 0.001, F = 47.94 for layered digital; p < 0.001, F = 48.05 for zirconia opaque; p < 0.001, F = 43.91 for zirconia translucent). For the layered groups, glazed stage was significantly different from all other steps (p < 0.001). For the layered conventional and digital groups, polishing using diamond paste was not significantly different from the polished and super-polished steps (p = 0.448, p = 0.153), while for the layered pressed group, polishing using diamond paste was not significantly different from the super polished step (p = 0.815). For monolithic groups, there were no significant differences between the polished and super-polished steps (p = 0.957 for zirconia opaque, p = 1.00 for zirconia translucent). Both the diamond paste and super-polished steps showed no significant differences (p = 0.620, p = 0.550) from the glazed surface in the opaque zirconia group. Conclusions Surface roughness of monolithic and layered zirconia was improved by polishing; however, only opaque zirconia reached the level of surface roughness of the glazed stage. Type of buildup affected the surface roughness of adjusted ceramics, with monolithic zirconia showing lower surface roughness than layered zirconia. Polishing with diamond paste provided no significant improvement in the surface roughness of monolithic or layered zirconia.
引用
收藏
页码:818 / 825
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effect of surface finishing and polishing procedures on color properties and translucency of monolithic zirconia restorations at varying thickness
    Saker, Samah
    Ozcan, Mutlu
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2021, 33 (06) : 953 - 963
  • [2] Effect of Polishing Systems on Surface Roughness and Topography of Monolithic Zirconia
    Goo, C. L.
    Yap, A. U. J.
    Tan, K. B. C.
    Fawzy, A. S.
    [J]. OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2016, 41 (04) : 417 - 423
  • [3] Effect of polishing systems on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of monolithic zirconia
    Tang, Z. Y.
    Zhao, X. Y.
    [J]. BASIC & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, 2019, 125 : 6 - 6
  • [4] An in vitro study to compare the surface roughness of glazed and chairside polished dental monolithic zirconia using two polishing systems
    Gaonkar, Sneha Harishchandra
    Aras, Meena Ajay
    Chitre, Vidya
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INDIAN PROSTHODONTIC SOCIETY, 2020, 20 (02): : 186 - 192
  • [5] Comparative evaluation of enamel wear against monolithic zirconia and layered zirconia after polishing and glazing: An in vitro study
    Shaik, Kamila
    Reddy, K. Mahendranadh
    Shastry, Y. Mahadev
    Aditya, S. Venkat
    Babu, P. Jaya Krishna
    [J]. THE JOURNAL OF INDIAN PROSTHODONTIC SOCIETY, 2022, 22 (04) : 354 - 360
  • [6] Evaluation of Surface Roughness, Hardness, and Gloss of Composites After Three Different Finishing and Polishing Techniques: An In Vitro Study
    Nithya, Kumar
    Sridevi, Krishnamoorthy
    Keerthi, Venkatesan
    Ravishankar, Periasamy
    [J]. CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2020, 12 (02)
  • [7] Effect of Different Decontamination Methods on Fracture Resistance, Microstructure, and Surface Roughness of Zirconia Restorations-In Vitro Study
    Darwich, Rama A.
    Awad, Manal
    Abou Neel, Ensanya A.
    [J]. MATERIALS, 2023, 16 (06)
  • [8] Effect of different surface and heat treatments on the surface roughness, crystallography, and phase composition of high translucency zirconia for monolithic restorations
    Hammoudeh, Hanin
    Carracho, Luis
    Beard, Charles
    Razzoog, Michael
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2024, 131 (01): : 164e1 - 164e11
  • [9] The effect of various polishing systems on surface roughness and phase transformation of monolithic zirconia
    Caglar, Ipek
    Ates, Sabit Melih
    Duymus, Zeynep Yesil
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS, 2018, 10 (02): : 132 - 137
  • [10] Effects of different finishing/polishing protocols and systems for monolithic zirconia on surface topography, phase transformation, and biofilm formation
    Mai, Hang-Nga
    Hong, Su-Hyung
    Kim, Sung-Hun
    Lee, Du-Hyeong
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS, 2019, 11 (02): : 81 - 87