.: ORİJİNAL ARAŞTIRMA
Farklı Dayanak Materyallerinin İmplant Destekli Tam Seramik Restorasyonların Final Rengine Etkilerinin Değerlendirilmesi
Evaluation of the Effect of Different Abutment Materials on the Final Color of Implant Supported Full Ceramic Restorations
Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci. 2020;26(3):426-33
doi: 10.5336/dentalsci.2019-71936
Makale Dili: TR
Tam Metin
Ücretsiz Erişim
ÖZET
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı implant dayanak materyallerinin, implant destekli tam seramik restorasyonların final rengine etkilerini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Disk şeklinde (10×1,5 mm) 30 adet titanyum (TiFast Titanium) ve 10 adet zirkonya (BruxZir® Solid Zirconia, renk A2) örnek farklı implant dayanak tiplerini temsil etmek üzere üretildi ve 4 adet dayanak grubu (n=10) oluşturuldu; Grup T: Titanyum, Grup OP: Opak uygulanmış titanyum, Grup AS: Anodize sarı titanyum ve Grup Z: Zirkonya dayanak (kontrol). A2 renginde 10 adet disk şeklinde (10×0,2 mm) siman örneği (RelyX' Unicem) hazırlandı. Monolitik zirkonya materyali (BruxZir® Anterior White) kullanılarak 40 adet restorasyon örneği (10×1 mm) üretildi. Dayanak, siman ve restorasyon örnekleri kullanılarak oluşturulan kuron konfigürasyonlarının CIE L*, a*, b* renk değerleri bir spektrofotometre yardımıyla ölçüldü. Kontrol ve test grupları arasındaki renk farklılıkları (∆E*) hesaplanarak, veriler tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD testi kullanılarak p˂,05 anlamlılık düzeyinde değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Gruplardan elde edilen L*, a*, b* parametreleri ve ∆E* değerleri arasında anlamlı farklılıklar tespit edilmiştir (p˂0,001). Grup T'de, diğer gruplara kıyasla anlamlı derecede düşük L* ve b* değeri elde edilmiştir. En yüksek ortalama ∆E* değeri Grup T'de (∆E*=5,01) elde edilirken, onu sırasıyla Grup OP (∆E*=2,44) ve Grup AS (∆E*=1,75) izlemiştir. Sonuç: Anodize sarı ve opak uygulanmış titanyum dayanak konfigürasyonları ile oluşan restorasyon final rengi, klinik olarak kabul edilebilir seviyededir. Opak uygulanmamış titanyum grubu ise istatistiksel olarak anlamlı en yüksek renk değişimi ile sonuçlanmış ve klinik kabul edilebilirlik eşiğini aşmıştır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Renk; dental implant-abutment tasarımı; estetik; titanyum; zirkonyum oksit
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı implant dayanak materyallerinin, implant destekli tam seramik restorasyonların final rengine etkilerini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Disk şeklinde (10×1,5 mm) 30 adet titanyum (TiFast Titanium) ve 10 adet zirkonya (BruxZir® Solid Zirconia, renk A2) örnek farklı implant dayanak tiplerini temsil etmek üzere üretildi ve 4 adet dayanak grubu (n=10) oluşturuldu; Grup T: Titanyum, Grup OP: Opak uygulanmış titanyum, Grup AS: Anodize sarı titanyum ve Grup Z: Zirkonya dayanak (kontrol). A2 renginde 10 adet disk şeklinde (10×0,2 mm) siman örneği (RelyX' Unicem) hazırlandı. Monolitik zirkonya materyali (BruxZir® Anterior White) kullanılarak 40 adet restorasyon örneği (10×1 mm) üretildi. Dayanak, siman ve restorasyon örnekleri kullanılarak oluşturulan kuron konfigürasyonlarının CIE L*, a*, b* renk değerleri bir spektrofotometre yardımıyla ölçüldü. Kontrol ve test grupları arasındaki renk farklılıkları (∆E*) hesaplanarak, veriler tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD testi kullanılarak p˂,05 anlamlılık düzeyinde değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Gruplardan elde edilen L*, a*, b* parametreleri ve ∆E* değerleri arasında anlamlı farklılıklar tespit edilmiştir (p˂0,001). Grup T'de, diğer gruplara kıyasla anlamlı derecede düşük L* ve b* değeri elde edilmiştir. En yüksek ortalama ∆E* değeri Grup T'de (∆E*=5,01) elde edilirken, onu sırasıyla Grup OP (∆E*=2,44) ve Grup AS (∆E*=1,75) izlemiştir. Sonuç: Anodize sarı ve opak uygulanmış titanyum dayanak konfigürasyonları ile oluşan restorasyon final rengi, klinik olarak kabul edilebilir seviyededir. Opak uygulanmamış titanyum grubu ise istatistiksel olarak anlamlı en yüksek renk değişimi ile sonuçlanmış ve klinik kabul edilebilirlik eşiğini aşmıştır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Renk; dental implant-abutment tasarımı; estetik; titanyum; zirkonyum oksit
ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of different implant abutment materials on the final color of implant retained full ceramic restorations. Material and Methods: Disc-shaped (10×1.5 mm) 30 titanium (TiFast Titanium) and 10 zirconia (BruxZir® Solid Zirconia, shade A2) specimens were produced to represent different implant abutment types and 4 abutment groups (n=10) created; Group T: Titanium, Group OP: Opaqued titanium, Group AS: Anodized yellow titanium and Group Z: Zirconia abutment (control). 10 disc shaped (10×0.2 mm) cement specimens (RelyX' Unicem) with shade A2 were prepared. 40 restoration specimens (10×1 mm) were produced using monolithic zirconia material (BruxZir® Anterior White). CIE L*, a*, b* color values of the crown configurations which were formed using the abutment, cement and restoration samples were measured with a spectrophotometer. The color differences (∆E*) between the control and test groups were calculated and the data were evaluated at a significance level of p˂.05 using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test. Results: Significant differences were determined between L*, a*, b* parameters and ∆E* values of the groups (p˂0.001). L* and b* values of Group T were significantly lower than other groups. The highest mean ∆E* value was obtained in Group T (∆E*=5,01) and it was followed by Group OP (∆E*=2,44) and Group AS (∆E*=1,75), respectively. Conclusion: The final color of the restoration obtained with anodized yellow and opaqued titanium abutment configurations was clinically acceptable. Nonopaqued titanium group resulted in significantly highest color change and exceeded the clinical acceptability threshold.
Keywords: Color; dental implant-abutment design; esthetics; titanium; zirconium oxide
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of different implant abutment materials on the final color of implant retained full ceramic restorations. Material and Methods: Disc-shaped (10×1.5 mm) 30 titanium (TiFast Titanium) and 10 zirconia (BruxZir® Solid Zirconia, shade A2) specimens were produced to represent different implant abutment types and 4 abutment groups (n=10) created; Group T: Titanium, Group OP: Opaqued titanium, Group AS: Anodized yellow titanium and Group Z: Zirconia abutment (control). 10 disc shaped (10×0.2 mm) cement specimens (RelyX' Unicem) with shade A2 were prepared. 40 restoration specimens (10×1 mm) were produced using monolithic zirconia material (BruxZir® Anterior White). CIE L*, a*, b* color values of the crown configurations which were formed using the abutment, cement and restoration samples were measured with a spectrophotometer. The color differences (∆E*) between the control and test groups were calculated and the data were evaluated at a significance level of p˂.05 using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test. Results: Significant differences were determined between L*, a*, b* parameters and ∆E* values of the groups (p˂0.001). L* and b* values of Group T were significantly lower than other groups. The highest mean ∆E* value was obtained in Group T (∆E*=5,01) and it was followed by Group OP (∆E*=2,44) and Group AS (∆E*=1,75), respectively. Conclusion: The final color of the restoration obtained with anodized yellow and opaqued titanium abutment configurations was clinically acceptable. Nonopaqued titanium group resulted in significantly highest color change and exceeded the clinical acceptability threshold.
Keywords: Color; dental implant-abutment design; esthetics; titanium; zirconium oxide
REFERANSLAR:
- Misch CE. Dental Implant Prosthetics. 1st ed. St. Louis: Mo. Elsevier; 2005. p.9-50.
- Binon PP. Implants and components: entering the new millenium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000;15(1):76-94. [PubMed]
- Cardaropoli G, Lekholm U, Wennström JL. Tissue alterations at implant-supported single-tooth replacements: a 1-year prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(2):165-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Magne P, Magne M, Jovanovic SA. An esthetic solution for single-implant restorations-type III porcelain veneer bonded to a screw-retained custom abutmant: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99(1):2-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Bressan E, Paniz G, Lops D, Corazza B, Romeo E, Favero G. Influence of abutment material on the gingival color of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: a prospective multicenter study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(6):631-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Vilhjálmsson VH, Klock KS, Størksen K, Bårdsen A. Aesthetics of implant-supported single anterior maxillary crowns evaluated by objective indices and participants' perceptions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(12):1399-403. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Dede DÖ, Armağanci A, Ceylan G, Celik E, Cankaya S, Yilmaz B. Influence of implant abutment material on the color of different ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(5):764-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Arif R, Yilmaz B, Mortazavi A, Ozcelik TB, Johnston WM. Effect of metal opaquer on the final color of 3 ceramic crown types on 3 abutment configurations. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(3):375-81. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Jung RE, Sailer I, Hämmerle CHF, Attin T, Schmidlin P. In vitro color changes of soft tissues caused by restorative materials. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007;27(3):251-7. [PubMed]
- Hasanreisoglu U, Oguz EI. 2015. [Evaluation of success criteria in implant dentistry]. Turkiye Klinikleri J Prosthodont-Special Topics. 2015;1(2):1-7.
- Chun HJ, Yeo IS, Lee JH, Kim SK, Heo SJ, Koak JY, et al. Fracture strength study of internally connected zirconia abutments reinforced with titanium inserts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(2):346-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Wittneben JG, Gavric J, Belser UC, Bornstein MM, Joda T, Chappuis V, et al. Esthetic and clinical performance of implant-supported all-ceramic crowns made with prefabricated or CAD/CAM zirconia abutments: a randomized, multicenter clinical trial. J Dent Res. 2017;96(2):163-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Andersson B, Odman P, Lindvall AM, Lithner B. Single-tooth restorations supported by osseointegrated implants: results and experiences from a prospective study after 2 to 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.1995;10(6),702-11. [PubMed]
- Ekelund JA, Lindquist LW, Carlsson GE, Jemt T. Implant treatment in the edentulous mandible: a prospective study on brånemark system implants over more than 20 years. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16(6):602-8. [PubMed]
- Corciolani G, Vichi A, Louca C, Ferrari M. Influence of layering thickness on the color parameters of a ceramic system. Dent Mater. 2010;26(8):737-42. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Cosgarea R, Gasparik C, Dudea D, Culic B, Dannewitz B, Sculean A. Peri-implant soft tissue colour around titanium and zirconia abutments: a prospective randomized controlled clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(5):537-44. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Guilherme NM, Chung KH, Flinn BD, Zheng C, Raigrodski AJ. Assessment of reliability of CAD-CAM tooth-colored implant custom abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(2):206-13. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sağlam Atsü S, Aksan ME, Bulut AC. Fracture resistance of titanium, zirconia, and ceramic-reinforced polyetheretherketone implant abutments supporting CAD/CAM monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic crowns after aging. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019;34(3):622-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Alqahtani F, Flinton R. Postfatigue fracture resistance of modified prefabricated zirconia implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(2):299-305. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Yilmaz B, Salaita LG, Seidt JD, McGlumphy EA, Clelland NL. Load to failure of different zirconia abutments for an internal hexagon implant. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(3):373-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Jirajariyavej B, Wanapirom P, Anunmana C. Influence of implant abutment material and ceramic thickness on optical properties. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(5):819-25. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Pecnik CM, Roos M, Muff D, Spolenak R, Sailer I. In vitro color evaluation of esthetic coatings for metallic dental implants and implant prosthetic appliances. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(5):563-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Wadhwani C, Brindis M, Kattadiyil MT, O'Brien R, Chung KH. Colorizing titanium-6aluminum-4vanadium alloy using electrochemical anodization: developing a color chart. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(1):26-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Martínez-Rus F, Prieto M, Salido MP, Madrigal C, Özcan M, Pradíes G. A clinical study assessing the influence of anodized titanium and zirconium dioxide abutments and peri-implant soft tissue thickness on the optical outcome of implant-supported lithium disilicate single crowns. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32(1):156-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Lee JH, Park JM, Park EJ, Koak JY, Kim SK, Heo SJ. Comparison of customized abutments made from titanium and a machinable precious alloy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(1):92-100. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Baldissara P, Llukacej A, Ciocca L, Valandro FL, Scotti R. Translucency of zirconia copings made with different CAD/CAM systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;104(1):6-12. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Dozić A, Kleverlaan CJ, Meegdes M, van der Zel J, Feilzer AJ. The influence of porcelain layer thickness on the final shade of ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90(6):563-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kurt M, Ural C, Kulunk T, Sanal AF, Erkoçak A. The effect of screw color and technique to fill access hole on the final color of screw-retained implant crowns. J Oral Implantol. 2011;37(6):673-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kılınç H, Turgut S. Optical behaviors of esthetic CAD-CAM restorations after different surface finishing and polishing procedures and UV aging: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(1):107-13. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Turgut S, Kılınç H, Bağış B. Effect of UV aging on translucency of currently used esthetic CAD-CAM materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019;31(2):147-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: İşlem Listesi