Evaluation of Physical Changes and Bond Properties of Monolithic Zirconia Following Surface Treatment with Alumina and Synthetic Diamond Particles: A Comparative X-ray Diffraction Analysis.
Arshi I Kazi, Ramandeep Dugal, Pallavi Madanshetty, Aamir Z Godil, Kashif Y Gandhi, Anam M Mukadam
{"title":"Evaluation of Physical Changes and Bond Properties of Monolithic Zirconia Following Surface Treatment with Alumina and Synthetic Diamond Particles: A Comparative X-ray Diffraction Analysis.","authors":"Arshi I Kazi, Ramandeep Dugal, Pallavi Madanshetty, Aamir Z Godil, Kashif Y Gandhi, Anam M Mukadam","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the phase transformation and effect on the bond strength and fracture toughness of monolithic zirconia after surface treatment with alumina and synthetic diamond particles.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty samples of monolithic sintered zirconia discs (Y-TZP) were divided into two groups of 20 samples each. Group A - air abrasion with alumina particles (<i>n</i> = 20); group B - air abrasion with synthetic diamond particles (<i>n</i> = 20). Pretreatment phase and posttreatment of each zirconia sample from group A and group B were evaluated using an X-ray diffraction machine. The surface roughness of each zirconia sample was evaluated using a profilometer. Composite discs were fabricated and bonded to the air-abraded surface of each zirconia sample from group A and group B using a dual-cured resin cement, respectively. These samples were mounted in an acrylic block to determine the bond strength of zirconia with resin cement using a universal testing machine. This was followed by a fracture toughness test of the samples using a Vickers indentation hardness tester. The results were subjected to statistical analysis using a t-test, and relevant statistical conclusions were drawn.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean ± SD of monoclinic content in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 0.82 ± 0.010% and 0.76 ± 0.015%, respectively. The mean ± SD of surface roughness in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 0.507 ± 0.106 and 0.513 ± 0.116 µm, respectively, and the mean ± SD of bond strength in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 6.11 ± 1.47 and 6.49 ± 0.83 MPa, respectively. The mean ± SD of fracture toughness in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 2.63 ± 0.46 0.5 and 5.70 ± 1.03 MPam<sup>0.5</sup>, respectively. <i>p</i> < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The distribution of mean monoclinic content was significantly higher in zirconia samples abraded by alumina (Group A) as compared to synthetic diamond particles (Group B). The mean surface roughness and bond strength results were statistically insignificant between both groups. The distribution of mean fracture toughness was significantly higher in group B compared to group A.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Synthetic diamond particles for air abrasion of Y-TZP can be a promising alternative to alumina as they cause minimal changes in the structural integrity without compromising the bond strength. How to cite this article: Kazi AI, Dugal R, Madanshetty P, et al. Evaluation of Physical Changes and Bond Properties of Monolithic Zirconia Following Surface Treatment with Alumina and Synthetic Diamond Particles: A Comparative X-ray Diffraction Analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(12):1110-1117.</p>","PeriodicalId":35792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","volume":"25 12","pages":"1110-1117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3794","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the phase transformation and effect on the bond strength and fracture toughness of monolithic zirconia after surface treatment with alumina and synthetic diamond particles.
Materials and methods: Forty samples of monolithic sintered zirconia discs (Y-TZP) were divided into two groups of 20 samples each. Group A - air abrasion with alumina particles (n = 20); group B - air abrasion with synthetic diamond particles (n = 20). Pretreatment phase and posttreatment of each zirconia sample from group A and group B were evaluated using an X-ray diffraction machine. The surface roughness of each zirconia sample was evaluated using a profilometer. Composite discs were fabricated and bonded to the air-abraded surface of each zirconia sample from group A and group B using a dual-cured resin cement, respectively. These samples were mounted in an acrylic block to determine the bond strength of zirconia with resin cement using a universal testing machine. This was followed by a fracture toughness test of the samples using a Vickers indentation hardness tester. The results were subjected to statistical analysis using a t-test, and relevant statistical conclusions were drawn.
Results: The mean ± SD of monoclinic content in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 0.82 ± 0.010% and 0.76 ± 0.015%, respectively. The mean ± SD of surface roughness in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 0.507 ± 0.106 and 0.513 ± 0.116 µm, respectively, and the mean ± SD of bond strength in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 6.11 ± 1.47 and 6.49 ± 0.83 MPa, respectively. The mean ± SD of fracture toughness in group A (alumina particles) and group B (synthetic diamond particles) was 2.63 ± 0.46 0.5 and 5.70 ± 1.03 MPam0.5, respectively. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Conclusion: The distribution of mean monoclinic content was significantly higher in zirconia samples abraded by alumina (Group A) as compared to synthetic diamond particles (Group B). The mean surface roughness and bond strength results were statistically insignificant between both groups. The distribution of mean fracture toughness was significantly higher in group B compared to group A.
Clinical significance: Synthetic diamond particles for air abrasion of Y-TZP can be a promising alternative to alumina as they cause minimal changes in the structural integrity without compromising the bond strength. How to cite this article: Kazi AI, Dugal R, Madanshetty P, et al. Evaluation of Physical Changes and Bond Properties of Monolithic Zirconia Following Surface Treatment with Alumina and Synthetic Diamond Particles: A Comparative X-ray Diffraction Analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(12):1110-1117.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice (JCDP), is a peer-reviewed, open access MEDLINE indexed journal. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.thejcdp.com. The journal allows free access (open access) to its contents. Articles with clinical relevance will be given preference for publication. The Journal publishes original research papers, review articles, rare and novel case reports, and clinical techniques. Manuscripts are invited from all specialties of dentistry i.e., conservative dentistry and endodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthodontics, oral medicine and radiology, oral pathology, oral surgery, orodental diseases, pediatric dentistry, implantology, periodontics, clinical aspects of public health dentistry, and prosthodontics.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
