IADR Abstract Archives
Roughness, Gloss and Opposing Enamel Wear of Translucent Zirconia
Objectives: To compare wear, antagonistic enamel wear, gloss and roughness of as-sintered, polished and glazed Lava™ Esthetic full-contour zirconia.
Methods: Presintered zirconia blanks were cut using a dry saw and hand-sanded with P2500 sand paper. Samples were sintered by heating for 10oC/min to 1500oC and holding at temperature for 2 hours. Three sets of specimens (n=8) were prepared as follows: 1) “As-sintered” , 2) glazed with IPS e.max® Ceram following the manufacturer’s IFU and 3) hand polished with NTI® CeraGlaze® Polishers (coarse, fine, and super fine) at 10,000 RPM followed by an Intra-oral DiaShine Fine paste using a soft bristle brush. Wear against maxillary central incisor enamel was measured as a reference. Specimens were mounted in the Alabama Wear Machine against modified human premolar antagonists and tested for 300,000 cycles (20N, 2mm sliding distance, 1Hz frequency, and 33% glycerine lubrication). Volumetric loss of zirconia and opposing enamel was measured using non-contact light profilometrey (10µm resolution). Surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a non-contact, light profilometer. A 4mm length was measured with 0.8mm cutoff length, and 136 surface filter number. Gloss was measured with a glossmeter (Novo-Curve). Data for each property was analyzed using individual 1-way ANOVAs and Tukey post-hoc analyses (alpha=0.05).
Results: .
Conclusions: Polished and as-sintered Lava Esthetic zirconia had no detectable wear while glazed specimens only showed wear of the glaze. Polished Lava Esthetic created the least amount of opposing enamel wear. Enamel, glazed and as-sintered specimens were in the same range. Polishing or glazing Lava Esthetic zirconia improved its gloss and decreased its roughness. Project sponsored by 3M.
Methods: Presintered zirconia blanks were cut using a dry saw and hand-sanded with P2500 sand paper. Samples were sintered by heating for 10oC/min to 1500oC and holding at temperature for 2 hours. Three sets of specimens (n=8) were prepared as follows: 1) “As-sintered” , 2) glazed with IPS e.max® Ceram following the manufacturer’s IFU and 3) hand polished with NTI® CeraGlaze® Polishers (coarse, fine, and super fine) at 10,000 RPM followed by an Intra-oral DiaShine Fine paste using a soft bristle brush. Wear against maxillary central incisor enamel was measured as a reference. Specimens were mounted in the Alabama Wear Machine against modified human premolar antagonists and tested for 300,000 cycles (20N, 2mm sliding distance, 1Hz frequency, and 33% glycerine lubrication). Volumetric loss of zirconia and opposing enamel was measured using non-contact light profilometrey (10µm resolution). Surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a non-contact, light profilometer. A 4mm length was measured with 0.8mm cutoff length, and 136 surface filter number. Gloss was measured with a glossmeter (Novo-Curve). Data for each property was analyzed using individual 1-way ANOVAs and Tukey post-hoc analyses (alpha=0.05).
Results: .
Conclusions: Polished and as-sintered Lava Esthetic zirconia had no detectable wear while glazed specimens only showed wear of the glaze. Polished Lava Esthetic created the least amount of opposing enamel wear. Enamel, glazed and as-sintered specimens were in the same range. Polishing or glazing Lava Esthetic zirconia improved its gloss and decreased its roughness. Project sponsored by 3M.