IADR Abstract Archives
Pin-on-block Wear of Different Dental Materials
Methods: Two-body wear tests were performed in a chewing simulator with steatite antagonists. A pin-on-block design with a vertical load of 50N for 1.2x105 cycles (f=1.6Hz; lateral movement: 1mm, mouth opening: 2mm) was used for the wear assay. An experimental material, feldspathic and lithiumdisilicate ceramics, one direct and two CAD/CAM-milled composites were investigated after polishing. A CAD/CAM-milled zirconia for full anatomical application was investigated after different surface treatments (grinding, glazing, veneering) (n=8/group). Human enamel specimens were used as reference for calculating relative wear data. Wear depth (Laserscan 3D, Willytec, G) of the specimens and wear area (light-microscope M420, Wild, CH) of the antagonists were determined. SEM (Quanta FEG 400, FEI, NL) pictures were used for evaluating wear performance of both, specimens and antagonists. Statistics: one-way ANOVA (a=0.05).
Results:
Material |
Manufacturer |
Specimen: relative wear depth/ enamel(274.14µm)=1 |
Steatite antagonist: relative wear area/ enamel(1.25mm2)=1 |
Experimental material |
Vita Zahnfabrik, G
|
0.44±0.21 |
1.61±0.23 |
In-Ceram YZ polished grinded grinded -glazed glazed (2x Akzent Glaze) veneered (0.6mm VM9) |
0.00±0.00 0.00±0.00 0.13±0.06 0.15±0.02 0.51±0.19 |
1.58±0.78 1.91±0.52 1.80±0.37 1.35±0.20 1.81±0.44 |
|
IPS e.max CAD |
Ivoclar Vivadent, G
|
0.43±0.18 |
1.67±0.53 |
Tetric EvoCeram |
0.51±0.08 |
1.74±0.30 |
|
Paradigm MZ100 |
3M Espe, G |
0.67±0.14 |
2.53±0.49 |
Ambarino high-class |
Creamed, G |
0.33±0.09 |
1.36±0.36 |
Conclusions: The results indicated similar wear for ceramics and veneered zirconia. Wear for the experimental material was comparable or lower. Composites showed significant differences in their wear rates. Polished and grinded zirconia provided no measurable wear. Antagonistic steatite wear of the experimental material did not differ significantly from zirconia and most of the other dental materials.