Wear assessment of current aesthetic crowns compared with human enamel after two finishing procedures: In vitro study (original) (raw)
Related papers
Quantitative measurement of tooth and ceramic wear: In vivo study
The International journal of prosthodontics
The aim of this study was to quantitatively measure tooth and ceramic wear over a 2-year period using a novel superimposition technique. Three ceramic systems--experimental hot-pressed ceramic (EC), Procera AllCeram (PA), and metal-ceramic--were used. A total of 90 posterior crowns in 48 patients were randomized into 3 groups, and impressions were made at baseline and at 6-month intervals for 2 years. Clinical images were taken after using a dye to highlight surface changes. The impressions were digitized and modeled as superimposable 3-dimensional colored surface images. The depth of wear at the occlusal contact areas was quantitatively measured at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The quantitative evaluation showed more wear in Procera AllCeram at the occlusal contact areas, whereas the experimental and metal-ceramic systems showed less wear. There was a significant difference in the amount of enamel worn between all types of restorations (P < .05). There was a statistically significan...
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 2013
Ceramic restorations have been widely used in dentistry. These restorations often require intraoral adjustment with diamond burs after their cementation causing increasing roughness of the ceramic surface. Consequently some finishing and polishing methods have been used to minimize this occurrence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the roughness of the ceramic surfaces submitted to different finishing and polishing methods. 144 specimens of VITAVM Ò 7, VM Ò 9 and VM Ò 13 (VITA Zahnfabrik) ceramics were fabricated and submitted to grinding using diamond burs. They were then divided into 15 groups (five of each ceramic type). Groups 1, 6 and 11-positive control (Glaze); Groups 2, 7 and 12-negative control (no polishing); Groups 3, 8 and 13-polished with abrasive rubbers (Edenta), felt disc and diamond polishing past; Groups 4, 9 and 14-polished with abrasive rubbers (Shofu), felt disc and diamond polishing past; Groups 5, 10 and 15-polished with aluminum oxide discs (Sof-Lex, 3M-ESPE), felt disc and diamond polishing paste. The roughness of the samples surfaces were measured using the rugosimeter Surfcorder SE 1700 and the data were submitted to statistical analysis using ANOVA and Tukey test at a level of significance of 5 %. There was statistically significance difference between the positive control groups and the other groups in all the ceramic types. Mechanical finishing and polishing methods were not able to provide a surface as smooth as the glazed surface for the tested ceramics. To assist dental practitioners to select the best finishing and polishing methods for the final adjustment of the ceramic restorations.
The International Journal of Prosthodontics
To comparatively evaluate the amount of wear of natural enamel against a glazed full coverage monolithic zirconia crown and a polished monolithic zirconia crown at 6 and 12 months. Materials and Methods: Thirty subjects within the age range of 18 to 35 years participated in this study. The subjects received a total of 60 single crowns, which were divided into two groups: (1) 30 glazed monolithic zirconia crowns opposed by natural enamel (group A); and (2) 30 polished monolithic zirconia crowns opposed by natural enamel (group B). Each subject received a crown from both groups, placed bilaterally in endodontically treated maxillary or mandibular first molars. An impression was made of the opposing arch at 24 hours, 6 months, and 12 months. The resulting casts were scanned with a 3D optical scanner. The recall scans were superimposed and compared to baseline scans using 3D AutoCAD software. A control group was included to compare the wear values to natural enamel against natural enamel. Results: No significant difference (P = .855) was found in enamel wear between groups A (42.80 µm) and B (42.50 µm) after 6 months of use. However, a significant difference (P < .05) in enamel wear was found between group A (81.87 µm) and group B (71.43 µm) after 12 months of use. Conclusion: Glazed monolithic zirconia crowns cause more wear to the opposing enamel than polished monolithic zirconia crowns after 12 months of clinical use.
Effect of different dental ceramic systems on the wear of human enamel: An in vitro study
The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 2015
The wear of tooth structure opposing different advanced dental ceramic systems requires investigation. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the wear of advanced ceramic systems against human enamel antagonists. Four ceramic systems (IPS e.max Press, IPS e.max CAD, Noritake Super Porcelain EX-3, and LAVA Plus Zirconia) and 1 control group containing human enamel specimens were used in this study (n = 12). All specimens were fabricated as disks 11 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick. The mesiopalatal cusps of the maxillary third molars were prepared to serve as the enamel styluses. All specimens were embedded individually in 25 mm(3) autopolymerizing acrylic resin blocks. Wear was measured with a cyclic loading machine and a newly designed wear simulator. All enamel styluses (cusps) were scanned using the Activity 880 digital scanner (SmartOptics). Data from the base line and follow-up scans were collected and compared with Qualify 2012 3-dimensional (3D) and 2D digital inspect...
Three-year clinical evaluation of two ceramic crown systems: A preliminary study
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2010
The clinical behavior of newly developed ceramic systems used for posterior restorations is relatively unknown. The preliminary results of this prospective clinical study support the use of the IPS e.max Press ceramic and Procera AllCeram crowns for the restoration of posterior teeth.
Comparison of the Effect of Feldspathic Porcelain and Zirconia on Natural Tooth Wear
2014
Background and Aim: Enamel wear is among the main disadvantages of ceramic restorations. Recently, use of full zirconia crowns without dental porcelain has been suggested. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of feldspathic porcelain and zirconia on the wear of natural teeth. Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, 22 zirconia specimens were fabricated; out of which, 11 specimens were polished and chosen as zirconia specimens while the remaining 11 were used to fabricate porcelain specimens. A total of 22 natural human teeth were also obtained. The natural teeth were photographed by a stereomicroscope in a fixed position and the distance from the cusp tip to a reference point was measured. Next, 11 teeth opposed zirconia and the remaining 11 opposed porcelain specimens in a chewing simulator and subjected to 120,000 masticatory cycles. The teeth were photographed again and the greatest difference between the before and after values was recorded. Results: The me...
Randomized clinical study of wear of enamel antagonists against polished monolithic zirconia crowns
Journal of Dentistry, 2018
Objectives: To test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the in vivo maximum wear of enamel opposing monolithic zirconia crowns, enamel opposing porcelain fused to metal crowns and enamel opposing enamel. Methods: Thirty patients needing single crowns were randomized to receive either a monolithic zirconia or metal-ceramic crown. Two non-restored opposing teeth in the same quadrants were identified to serve as enamel controls. After cementation, quadrants were scanned for baseline data. Polyvinylsiloxane impressions were obtained and poured in white stone. Patients were recalled at six-months and one-year for re-impression. Stone models were scanned using a tabletop laserscanner to determine maximum wear. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U to determine any significant differences between the wear of enamel against zirconia and metal-ceramic crowns. Results: Sixteen zirconia and 14 metal-ceramic crowns were delivered. There were no statistical differences in mean wear of crown types (p = 0.165); enamel antagonists (p = 0.235) and enamel controls (p = 0.843) after one year. Conclusion: Monolithic zirconia exhibited comparable wear of enamel compared with metal-ceramic crowns and control enamel after one year. Significance: This study is clinically significant because the use of polished monolithic zirconia demonstrated comparable wear of opposing enamel to metal-ceramic and enamel antagonists.