IADR Abstract Archives
In-vitro Surface Roughness of Novel Chairside Resilient CAD/CAM Material
Objectives: This in-vitro study measured the differences in surface smoothness of a novel resilient CAD/CAM ceramic and a hybrid CAD/CAM ceramic using two different polishing techniques for chairside applications.
Methods: Groups of 15 samples for each combination of material/polishing technique (N=90) had a cuspal coverage onlay milled on a CAD/CAM system (MCX/Dentsply Sirona). The materials included Cerasmart 270 (GC America) and Vita Enamic (Vita Zahnfabrik). One calibrated operator polished groups of each material with 2 polishing sytems: brush-paste (BP = Diapolisher, GC America) and spiral polishers (SP = Meisinger USA). Surface roughness was assessed using a confocal laser microscope (Lext OLS4000/Olympus).
Results: ANOVA analysis revealed statistically significant difference in mean 3D roughness values (Sa) among materials and polishers. Tukey multiple comparisons showed statistically significant difference between materials for mean baseline Sa values (as milled) as well as after polishing with brush-paste system. No statistically significant difference was found between materials when samples were polished with spiral polishers.
Conclusions: Mean baseline Sa values (as milled) for Cerasmart 270 were significantly smoother than Vita Enamic baseline values. The brush-paste polisher provided the lowest surface roughness values for Cerasmart 270 samples, which were significantly smoother than Vita Enamic samples. There was no statistically significant difference in mean Sa values between materials when spiral polishers were used. This study was funded by a research grant from GC America.
Methods: Groups of 15 samples for each combination of material/polishing technique (N=90) had a cuspal coverage onlay milled on a CAD/CAM system (MCX/Dentsply Sirona). The materials included Cerasmart 270 (GC America) and Vita Enamic (Vita Zahnfabrik). One calibrated operator polished groups of each material with 2 polishing sytems: brush-paste (BP = Diapolisher, GC America) and spiral polishers (SP = Meisinger USA). Surface roughness was assessed using a confocal laser microscope (Lext OLS4000/Olympus).
Results: ANOVA analysis revealed statistically significant difference in mean 3D roughness values (Sa) among materials and polishers. Tukey multiple comparisons showed statistically significant difference between materials for mean baseline Sa values (as milled) as well as after polishing with brush-paste system. No statistically significant difference was found between materials when samples were polished with spiral polishers.
Conclusions: Mean baseline Sa values (as milled) for Cerasmart 270 were significantly smoother than Vita Enamic baseline values. The brush-paste polisher provided the lowest surface roughness values for Cerasmart 270 samples, which were significantly smoother than Vita Enamic samples. There was no statistically significant difference in mean Sa values between materials when spiral polishers were used. This study was funded by a research grant from GC America.