Evaluation of translucency and strength of two glass ceramics after different surface treatments

Mennatallah Wahba, T. Morsi, A. Mohamed, A. EL-Etreby
{"title":"Evaluation of translucency and strength of two glass ceramics after different surface treatments","authors":"Mennatallah Wahba, T. Morsi, A. Mohamed, A. EL-Etreby","doi":"10.21608/ajdsm.2022.159194.1364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To investigate the effect of different surface treatments on biaxial flexural strength and translucency of two different glass-ceramics. Materials and Methods: Sixty disc-shaped specimens (10 mm x 0.3 mm) were divided into two groups (n=30) according to the type of the ceramic material; lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS e.max CAD), and leucite reinforced ceramic (IPS Empress CAD). Each group was divided into three subgroups (n=10) according to the surface treatment applied; whether hydrofluoric acid etching, sandblasting, or no treatment. Translucency Parameter was measured over black and white backgrounds using dental spectrophotometer VITA Easyshade Compact, while bi-axial flexural strength was measured using a ball on ring fixture test. Data was statistically analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc analysis (α = 0.05). Results: There was a significant difference (P <0.05) in translucency parameter between all surface treatments used for IPS E.max CAD groups, while for IPS Empress CAD there was a significant difference (P < 0.05) in translucency between both the control and hydrofluoric acid groups as well as between hydrofluoric acid and sandblasted groups. There was no significant difference in bi-axial flexural strength between different types of surface treatments used for IPS E.max CAD. IPS Empress CAD groups showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) only between the control and the hydrofluoric acid groups. Conclusions: IPS E.max CAD had higher translucency and biaxial flexural strength. Different surface treatments used affected the flexural strength and translucency negatively in both materials used.","PeriodicalId":117944,"journal":{"name":"Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/ajdsm.2022.159194.1364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effect of different surface treatments on biaxial flexural strength and translucency of two different glass-ceramics. Materials and Methods: Sixty disc-shaped specimens (10 mm x 0.3 mm) were divided into two groups (n=30) according to the type of the ceramic material; lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS e.max CAD), and leucite reinforced ceramic (IPS Empress CAD). Each group was divided into three subgroups (n=10) according to the surface treatment applied; whether hydrofluoric acid etching, sandblasting, or no treatment. Translucency Parameter was measured over black and white backgrounds using dental spectrophotometer VITA Easyshade Compact, while bi-axial flexural strength was measured using a ball on ring fixture test. Data was statistically analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc analysis (α = 0.05). Results: There was a significant difference (P <0.05) in translucency parameter between all surface treatments used for IPS E.max CAD groups, while for IPS Empress CAD there was a significant difference (P < 0.05) in translucency between both the control and hydrofluoric acid groups as well as between hydrofluoric acid and sandblasted groups. There was no significant difference in bi-axial flexural strength between different types of surface treatments used for IPS E.max CAD. IPS Empress CAD groups showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) only between the control and the hydrofluoric acid groups. Conclusions: IPS E.max CAD had higher translucency and biaxial flexural strength. Different surface treatments used affected the flexural strength and translucency negatively in both materials used.
两种玻璃陶瓷不同表面处理后的透光性和强度评价
目的:探讨不同表面处理对两种微晶玻璃双轴抗折强度和透光率的影响。材料与方法:60个盘状标本(10 mm × 0.3 mm)按陶瓷材料类型分为两组(n=30);二硅酸锂陶瓷(IPS e.max CAD)和白晶石增强陶瓷(IPS Empress CAD)。每组按表面处理情况分为3个亚组(n=10);无论是氢氟酸蚀刻、喷砂,还是无处理。采用牙科分光光度计VITA Easyshade Compact在黑白背景下测量半透明参数,采用球环夹具测试双轴弯曲强度。数据采用方差分析和Tukey事后分析(α = 0.05)进行统计学分析。结果:IPS E.max CAD各表面处理间的半透明参数差异有统计学意义(P <0.05),而IPS皇后CAD表面处理间的半透明参数差异有统计学意义(P <0.05),对照组与氢氟酸组、氢氟酸与喷砂组之间差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。不同表面处理对IPS E.max CAD的双轴抗折强度无显著影响。IPS皇后CAD组仅在对照组和氢氟酸组之间有显著差异(P < 0.05)。结论:IPS E.max CAD具有较高的透光性和双轴抗折强度。不同的表面处理对两种材料的抗弯强度和透光率都有负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信