Effect of different finishing/polishing techniques and glaze application on the flexural strength of ultratranslucent zirconia after hydrothermal aging

IF 3.3 2区医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials Pub Date : 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2025.106924

Sarah Emille Gomes da Silva , Bianca Cristina Dantas da Silva , Anne Heloyse Teixeira Crispim , Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva , Cornelis Johannes Kleverlaan , Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção e Souza

{"title":"Effect of different finishing/polishing techniques and glaze application on the flexural strength of ultratranslucent zirconia after hydrothermal aging","authors":"Sarah Emille Gomes da Silva , Bianca Cristina Dantas da Silva , Anne Heloyse Teixeira Crispim , Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva , Cornelis Johannes Kleverlaan , Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção e Souza","doi":"10.1016/j.jmbbm.2025.106924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To evaluate the effect of different finishing/polishing procedures and glaze on the surface roughness, flexure strength, and microstructure of an ultratranslucent zirconia (UZ) submitted aging.</div></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><div>Two hundred and forty (240) UZ bars were sintered (8 × 2 × 1 mm) and treated according to the factors (n = 15): Type of finishing/polishing procedure (Control - Ctrl; Ultra-fine Diamond Burr - FG; Medium grit diamond burr- MG; Stone Bur - Stone; Rubber - Rub; FG + Rub; MG + Rub; Stone + Rub), and “Glaze” (Without and With - Gl). The bars were hydrothermally degraded (24 h, 127 °C, 1.7 bar), submitted to roughness analysis and 3-point mini flexural strength (FS) test. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), X-ray Diffraction (XDR), and Weibull analysis were performed. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey test (5%).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Finishing/Polishing’ and its interaction with ‘Glaze’ were statistically significant (P < 0.0001) for FS, unlike ‘Glaze’ alone (P = 0.8827). Rub (602.11 MPa<sup>A</sup>), Stone + Rub (555.50 MPa<sup>AB</sup>), and Ctrl (621.72 MPa<sup>A</sup>) showed superior FS, while FG_GL showed the lowest FS. Stone + Rub showed the highest Weibull modulus (13.15<sup>a</sup>). Ctrl_Gl (0.18 ± 0.02<sup>F</sup> μm) and Ctrl + Rub_Gl (0.29 ± 0.07<sup>F</sup> μm) showed the lowest roughness. Glaze (0.48<sup>B</sup>) reduced the roughness of the groups that did not receive it (1.56<sup>A</sup>), with MG (2.60 ± 0.69<sup>A</sup> μm) and FG (2.50 ± 0.7<sup>A</sup> μm) exhibiting rougher surfaces.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Rubber polishers are ideal for minor adjustments to UZ while Stone followed by rubber is effective for greater abrasion without compromising mechanical strength. The application of glaze did not reduce mechanical strength and resulted in lower surface roughness compared to the non-glazed groups, with the exception of the FG groups.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 106924"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751616125000402","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of different finishing/polishing procedures and glaze on the surface roughness, flexure strength, and microstructure of an ultratranslucent zirconia (UZ) submitted aging.

Methodology

Two hundred and forty (240) UZ bars were sintered (8 × 2 × 1 mm) and treated according to the factors (n = 15): Type of finishing/polishing procedure (Control - Ctrl; Ultra-fine Diamond Burr - FG; Medium grit diamond burr- MG; Stone Bur - Stone; Rubber - Rub; FG + Rub; MG + Rub; Stone + Rub), and “Glaze” (Without and With - Gl). The bars were hydrothermally degraded (24 h, 127 °C, 1.7 bar), submitted to roughness analysis and 3-point mini flexural strength (FS) test. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), X-ray Diffraction (XDR), and Weibull analysis were performed. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey test (5%).

Results

Finishing/Polishing’ and its interaction with ‘Glaze’ were statistically significant (P < 0.0001) for FS, unlike ‘Glaze’ alone (P = 0.8827). Rub (602.11 MPa^A), Stone + Rub (555.50 MPa^AB), and Ctrl (621.72 MPa^A) showed superior FS, while FG_GL showed the lowest FS. Stone + Rub showed the highest Weibull modulus (13.15^a). Ctrl_Gl (0.18 ± 0.02^F μm) and Ctrl + Rub_Gl (0.29 ± 0.07^F μm) showed the lowest roughness. Glaze (0.48^B) reduced the roughness of the groups that did not receive it (1.56^A), with MG (2.60 ± 0.69^A μm) and FG (2.50 ± 0.7^A μm) exhibiting rougher surfaces.

Conclusions

Rubber polishers are ideal for minor adjustments to UZ while Stone followed by rubber is effective for greater abrasion without compromising mechanical strength. The application of glaze did not reduce mechanical strength and resulted in lower surface roughness compared to the non-glazed groups, with the exception of the FG groups.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials 工程技术-材料科学：生物材料

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

7.70%

发文量

505

审稿时长

46 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials is concerned with the mechanical deformation, damage and failure under applied forces, of biological material (at the tissue, cellular and molecular levels) and of biomaterials, i.e. those materials which are designed to mimic or replace biological materials. The primary focus of the journal is the synthesis of materials science, biology, and medical and dental science. Reports of fundamental scientific investigations are welcome, as are articles concerned with the practical application of materials in medical devices. Both experimental and theoretical work is of interest; theoretical papers will normally include comparison of predictions with experimental data, though we recognize that this may not always be appropriate. The journal also publishes technical notes concerned with emerging experimental or theoretical techniques, letters to the editor and, by invitation, review articles and papers describing existing techniques for the benefit of an interdisciplinary readership.