.: ORİJİNAL ARAŞTIRMA
Farklı Parlatma Yöntemlerinin İki Farklı CAD/CAM Cam Seramiğin Yüzey Pürüzlülüğü Üzerine Etkisi: İn Vitro Çalışma
Effect of Different Polishing Methods on the Surface Roughness of Two Different CAD/CAM Glass Ceramics: In Vitro Study
Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci. 2022;28(1):157-64
doi: 10.5336/dentalsci.2021-83808
Makale Dili: TR
Tam Metin
Ücretsiz Erişim
ÖZET
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı parlatma tekniklerinin 2 farklı bilgisayar destekli tasarım/bilgisayar destekli üretim [computer aided design/ computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)] cam seramiğin yüzey pürüzlülüğü üzerine etkisini incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Toplamda 96 adet dikdörtgen şekilli lityum disilikat (IPS e.max CAD, LDS) ve zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat (Vita Suprinity, ZLS) cam seramik örnek üretici talimatları doğrultusunda üretildi ve sırasıyla 600 ve 1000 grenli silikon karbid kâğıtlar kullanılarak zımparalandı. Her bir seramiğe ait örnekler parlatma yöntemlerine göre rastgele 4 alt gruba ayrıldı (n=12): Kontrol, glaze, polisaj patı (Diapolisher), polisaj lastiği (Identoflex). Ortalama yüzey pürüzlülüklerinin (Ra; μm) belirlenebilmesi için profilometre kullanıldı. Her örnekte 3 farklı bölgeden ve 3 farklı yönde toplam 9 ölçüm yapıldı. Her gruptan bir örneğe taramalı elektron mikroskobu analizi uygulandı. Veriler 2 yönlü ANOVA ve Tamhane testleri kullanılarak analiz edildi (α=0,05). Bulgular: ZLS kontrol grubu en yüksek yüzey pürüzlülüğünü, LDS glaze grubu ise en düşük yüzey pürüzlülüğü değerlerini göstermiştir. Parlatma yöntemi uygulanan tüm gruplarda kontrol gruplarına göre önemli ölçüde düşük Ra değerleri elde edilmiştir. Glaze grupları diğer gruplara göre daha düşük Ra değerleri göstermiştir (p<0,05). LDS örneklerde pat ve lastik grubu arasındaki fark önemli bulunmazken (p>0,05), ZLS pat grubu lastik grubuna göre daha yüksek Ra değerleri göstermiştir (p<0,05). Sonuç: Bu çalışmada kullanılan bütün parlatma yöntemleri cam seramiklerin yüzey pürüzlülüğünü azaltmada etkili bulunmuştur.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Cam seramikler; yüzey özellikleri
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı parlatma tekniklerinin 2 farklı bilgisayar destekli tasarım/bilgisayar destekli üretim [computer aided design/ computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)] cam seramiğin yüzey pürüzlülüğü üzerine etkisini incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Toplamda 96 adet dikdörtgen şekilli lityum disilikat (IPS e.max CAD, LDS) ve zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat (Vita Suprinity, ZLS) cam seramik örnek üretici talimatları doğrultusunda üretildi ve sırasıyla 600 ve 1000 grenli silikon karbid kâğıtlar kullanılarak zımparalandı. Her bir seramiğe ait örnekler parlatma yöntemlerine göre rastgele 4 alt gruba ayrıldı (n=12): Kontrol, glaze, polisaj patı (Diapolisher), polisaj lastiği (Identoflex). Ortalama yüzey pürüzlülüklerinin (Ra; μm) belirlenebilmesi için profilometre kullanıldı. Her örnekte 3 farklı bölgeden ve 3 farklı yönde toplam 9 ölçüm yapıldı. Her gruptan bir örneğe taramalı elektron mikroskobu analizi uygulandı. Veriler 2 yönlü ANOVA ve Tamhane testleri kullanılarak analiz edildi (α=0,05). Bulgular: ZLS kontrol grubu en yüksek yüzey pürüzlülüğünü, LDS glaze grubu ise en düşük yüzey pürüzlülüğü değerlerini göstermiştir. Parlatma yöntemi uygulanan tüm gruplarda kontrol gruplarına göre önemli ölçüde düşük Ra değerleri elde edilmiştir. Glaze grupları diğer gruplara göre daha düşük Ra değerleri göstermiştir (p<0,05). LDS örneklerde pat ve lastik grubu arasındaki fark önemli bulunmazken (p>0,05), ZLS pat grubu lastik grubuna göre daha yüksek Ra değerleri göstermiştir (p<0,05). Sonuç: Bu çalışmada kullanılan bütün parlatma yöntemleri cam seramiklerin yüzey pürüzlülüğünü azaltmada etkili bulunmuştur.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Cam seramikler; yüzey özellikleri
ABSTRACT
Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of different polishing techniques on surface roughness of 2 different computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) glass ceramics. Material and Methods: A total of 96 rectangular lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD, LDS) and zirconia reinforced lithium silicate (Vita Suprinity, ZLS) glass-ceramic specimens were prepared according to manufacturers' instructions and ground using 600 and 1000 grit silicon carbide abrasive papers, respectively. Each type of ceramic specimens were randomly divided into 4 subgroups (n=12) according to the polishing methods used: Control, Glaze, Polishing paste (Diapolisher), Ceramic polisher (Identoflex). Surface profilometer was used to determine the average surface roughness (Ra; μm). A total of 9 readings were performed for each specimen at 3 different locations and 3 different directions. Scanning electron microscopy was performed on one specimen per group. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tamhane tests (α=0.05). Results: ZLS control group exhibited the highest mean Ra, while the lowest values were found in LDS glaze. Significantly lower Ra values were obtained in all polishing groups compared to the control groups. Glaze groups showed statistically lower Ra values compared to others (p<0.05). The difference between polishing paste and ceramic polisher was not significant for LDS (p>0.05), while polishing paste showed statistically higher Ra compared to ceramic polisher for ZLS (p<0.05). Conclusion: All polishing techniques used in this study were effective in decreasing the surface roughness of glass-ceramics.
Keywords: Surface properties; glass ceramics
Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of different polishing techniques on surface roughness of 2 different computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) glass ceramics. Material and Methods: A total of 96 rectangular lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD, LDS) and zirconia reinforced lithium silicate (Vita Suprinity, ZLS) glass-ceramic specimens were prepared according to manufacturers' instructions and ground using 600 and 1000 grit silicon carbide abrasive papers, respectively. Each type of ceramic specimens were randomly divided into 4 subgroups (n=12) according to the polishing methods used: Control, Glaze, Polishing paste (Diapolisher), Ceramic polisher (Identoflex). Surface profilometer was used to determine the average surface roughness (Ra; μm). A total of 9 readings were performed for each specimen at 3 different locations and 3 different directions. Scanning electron microscopy was performed on one specimen per group. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tamhane tests (α=0.05). Results: ZLS control group exhibited the highest mean Ra, while the lowest values were found in LDS glaze. Significantly lower Ra values were obtained in all polishing groups compared to the control groups. Glaze groups showed statistically lower Ra values compared to others (p<0.05). The difference between polishing paste and ceramic polisher was not significant for LDS (p>0.05), while polishing paste showed statistically higher Ra compared to ceramic polisher for ZLS (p<0.05). Conclusion: All polishing techniques used in this study were effective in decreasing the surface roughness of glass-ceramics.
Keywords: Surface properties; glass ceramics
REFERANSLAR:
- Kelly JR, Benetti P. Ceramic materials in dentistry: historical evolution and current practice. Aust Dent J. 2011;56 Suppl 1:84-96. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Belli R, Wendler M, de Ligny D, Cicconi MR, Petschelt A, Peterlik H, et al. Chairside CAD/CAM materials. Part 1: measurement of elastic constants and microstructural characterization. Dent Mater. 2017;33(1):84-98. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Fasbinder DJ. Materials for chairside CAD/CAM restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2010;31(9):702-9. [PubMed]
- Wolfart S, Eschbach S, Scherrer S, Kern M. Clinical outcome of three-unit lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic fixed dental prostheses: up to 8 years results. Dent Mater. 2009;25(9):e63-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Zarone F, Di Mauro MI, Ausiello P, Ruggiero G, Sorrentino R. Current status on lithium disilicate and zirconia: a narrative review. BMC Oral Health. 2019;19(1):134. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Sieper K, Wille S, Kern M. Fracture strength of lithium disilicate crowns compared to polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network and zirconia reinforced lithium silicate crowns. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017;74:342-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Jones CS, Billington RW, Pearson GJ. The in vivo perception of roughness of restorations. Br Dent J. 2004;196(1):42-5; discussion 31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Lohbauer U, Müller FA, Petschelt A. Influence of surface roughness on mechanical strength of resin composite versus glass ceramic materials. Dent Mater. 2008;24(2):250-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kawai K, Urano M, Ebisu S. Effect of surface roughness of porcelain on adhesion of bacteria and their synthesizing glucans. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83(6):664-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Quirynen M, Bollen CM. The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra- and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of the literature. J Clin Periodontol. 1995;22(1):1-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Ghazal M, Kern M. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101(5): 342-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Mota EG, Smidt LN, Fracasso LM, Burnett LH Jr, Spohr AM. The effect of milling and postmilling procedures on the surface roughness of CAD/CAM materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017;29(6):450-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Yilmaz K, Ozkan P. Profilometer evaluation of the effect of various polishing methods on the surface roughness in dental ceramics of different structures subjected to repeated firings. Quintessence Int. 2010;41(7):e125-31. [PubMed]
- Maciel LC, Silva CFB, de Jesus RH, Concílio LRDS, Kano SC, Xible AA. Influence of polishing systems on roughness and color change of two dental ceramics. J Adv Prosthodont. 2019;11(4):215-22. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Rashid H. The effect of surface roughness on ceramics used in dentistry: a review of literature. Eur J Dent. 2014;8(4):571-9. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Mohammadibassir M, Rezvani MB, Golzari H, Moravej Salehi E, Fahimi MA, Kharazi Fard MJ. Effect of two polishing systems on surface roughness, topography, and flexural strength of a monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(1):e172-e80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Alhabdan A, El-Hejazi A. Comparison of surface roughness of ceramics after polishing with different intraoral polishing systems using profilometer and SEM. J Dent Health Oral Disord Ther. 2015;2(3):1-11. [Crossref]
- Vichi A, Fabian Fonzar R, Goracci C, Carrabba M, Ferrari M. Effect of finishing and polishing on roughness and gloss of lithium disilicate and lithium silicate zirconia reinforced glass ceramic for CAD/CAM systems. Oper Dent. 2018;43(1):90-100. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sarikaya I, Güler AU. Effects of different polishing techniques on the surface roughness of dental porcelains. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010;18(1): 10-6. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Flury S, Lussi A, Zimmerli B. Performance of different polishing techniques for direct CAD/CAM ceramic restorations. Oper Dent. 2010;35(4):470-81. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sagsoz O, Demirci T, Demirci G, Sagsoz NP, Yildiz M. The effects of different polishing techniques on the staining resistance of CAD/CAM resin-ceramics. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016;8(6): 417-22. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Mohammed B, Afram B, Nazar Z. An evaluation of the effect of different surface treatment on hardness and smoothness of pressable ceramic (in vitro study). IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2015;14(2):84-9. [Link]
- de Jager N, Feilzer AJ, Davidson CL. The influence of surface roughness on porcelain strength. Dent Mater. 2000;16(6):381-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Bollen CM, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. Dent Mater. 1997;13(4):258-69. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kilinc 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]
- Matzinger M, Hahnel S, Preis V, Rosentritt M. Polishing effects and wear performance of chairside CAD/CAM materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23(2):725-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Amaya-Pajares SP, Ritter AV, Vera Resendiz C, Henson BR, Culp L, Donovan TE. Effect of finishing and polishing on the surface roughness of four ceramic materials after occlusal adjustment. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2016;28(6): 382-96. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sarac D, Sarac YS, Yuzbasioglu E, Bal S. The effects of porcelain polishing systems on the color and surface texture of feldspathic porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96(2):122-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Bottino MC, Valandro LF, Kantorski KZ, Bressiani JC, Bottino MA. Polishing methods of an alumina-reinforced feldspar ceramic. Braz Dent J. 2006;17(4):285-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Janyavula S, Lawson N, Cakir D, Beck P, Ramp LC, Burgess JO. The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(1):22-9. Erratum in: J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(1):159. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Oliveira-Junior OB, Buso L, Fujiy FH, Lombardo GH, Campos F, Sarmento HR, et al. Influence of polishing procedures on the surface roughness of dental ceramics made by different techniques. Gen Dent. 2013;61(1):e4-8. Erratum in: Gen Dent. 2013;61(2):75. [PubMed]
- Martínez-Gomis J, Bizar J, Anglada JM, Samsó J, Peraire M. Comparative evaluation of four finishing systems on one ceramic surface. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16(1):74-7. [PubMed]
- Bollen CM, Papaioanno W, Van Eldere J, Schepers E, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. The influence of abutment surface roughness on plaque accumulation and peri-implant mucositis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1996;7(3):201-11. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Ludovichetti FS, Trindade FZ, Adabo GL, Pezzato L, Fonseca RG. Effect of grinding and polishing on the roughness and fracture resistance of cemented CAD-CAM monolithic materials submitted to mechanical aging. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(5):e1-e8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Endo T, Finger WJ, Kanehira M, Utterodt A, Komatsu M. Surface texture and roughness of polished nanofill and nanohybrid resin composites. Dent Mater J. 2010;29(2):213-23. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: İşlem Listesi