The effect of different surface treatment techniques on the surface roughness of feldspathic porcelain.

Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry Pub Date : 2016-10-01 eCollection Date: 2016-01-01 DOI:10.17096/jiufd.30632
Fidan Alakus Sabuncuoglu, Ergul Erturk
{"title":"The effect of different surface treatment techniques on the surface roughness of feldspathic porcelain.","authors":"Fidan Alakus Sabuncuoglu,&nbsp;Ergul Erturk","doi":"10.17096/jiufd.30632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This in vitro study compared the effect of five different techniques on the surface roughness of feldspathic porcelain.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>100 feldspathic porcelain disk samples mounted in acrylic resin blocks were divided into five groups (n=20) according to type of surface treatment: I, hydrofluoric acid (HFA); II, Deglazed surface porcelain treated with Neodymium:yttrium- aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser; III, Deglazed porcelain surface treated with Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser; IV, Glazed porcelain surface treated with Neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser, V; Glazed porcelain surface treated with Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser. The surface roughness of porcelain was measured with a noncontact optical profilometer. For each porcelain sample, two readings were taken across the sample, before porcelain surface treatment (T1) and after porcelain surface treatment (T2). The roughness parameter analyzed was the average roughness (Ra). Statistical analysis was performed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Wilcoxon signed rank test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean Ra values for each group were as follows: I, 12.64±073; II, 11.91±0.74; III, 11.76±0.59; IV, 3.82±0.65; V, 2.77±0.57. For all porcelain groups, the lowest Ra values were observed in Group V. The highest Ra values were observed for Group I, with a significant difference with the other groups. Kolmogorov-Smirnov showed significant differences among groups (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surface treatment of porcelain with HFA resulted in significantly higher Ra than laser groups. Both Er:YAG laser or Nd:YAG laser on the deglaze porcelain surface can be recommended as viable treatment alternatives to acid etching.</p>","PeriodicalId":30947,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry","volume":"50 3","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17096/jiufd.30632","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17096/jiufd.30632","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose: This in vitro study compared the effect of five different techniques on the surface roughness of feldspathic porcelain.

Materials and methods: 100 feldspathic porcelain disk samples mounted in acrylic resin blocks were divided into five groups (n=20) according to type of surface treatment: I, hydrofluoric acid (HFA); II, Deglazed surface porcelain treated with Neodymium:yttrium- aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser; III, Deglazed porcelain surface treated with Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser; IV, Glazed porcelain surface treated with Neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser, V; Glazed porcelain surface treated with Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser. The surface roughness of porcelain was measured with a noncontact optical profilometer. For each porcelain sample, two readings were taken across the sample, before porcelain surface treatment (T1) and after porcelain surface treatment (T2). The roughness parameter analyzed was the average roughness (Ra). Statistical analysis was performed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Wilcoxon signed rank test.

Results: Mean Ra values for each group were as follows: I, 12.64±073; II, 11.91±0.74; III, 11.76±0.59; IV, 3.82±0.65; V, 2.77±0.57. For all porcelain groups, the lowest Ra values were observed in Group V. The highest Ra values were observed for Group I, with a significant difference with the other groups. Kolmogorov-Smirnov showed significant differences among groups (p<0.001).

Conclusion: Surface treatment of porcelain with HFA resulted in significantly higher Ra than laser groups. Both Er:YAG laser or Nd:YAG laser on the deglaze porcelain surface can be recommended as viable treatment alternatives to acid etching.

Abstract Image

不同表面处理工艺对长石瓷表面粗糙度的影响。
目的:比较五种不同工艺对长石瓷表面粗糙度的影响。材料与方法:将100个长石瓷盘样品装入丙烯酸树脂块中,按表面处理类型分为5组(n=20): 1、氢氟酸(HFA);二、钕钇铝石榴石(Nd:YAG)激光处理脱釉表面瓷;三、铒钇铝石榴石(Er:YAG)激光处理脱釉瓷表面;四、用钕钇铝石榴石(Nd:YAG)激光处理釉面瓷;用铒钇铝石榴石(Er:YAG)激光处理釉面瓷。采用非接触式光学轮廓仪对陶瓷表面粗糙度进行了测量。对于每个瓷器样品,在瓷器表面处理之前(T1)和瓷器表面处理之后(T2)对样品进行两次读数。分析的粗糙度参数为平均粗糙度(Ra)。统计学分析采用Kolmogorov-Smirnov和Wilcoxon符号秩检验。结果:各组平均Ra值为:I, 12.64±073;二世,11.91±0.74;第三,11.76±0.59;第四,3.82±0.65;V, 2.77±0.57。在所有瓷质组中,Ra值以v组最低,Ra值以I组最高,与其他组差异显著。结论:HFA表面处理后的Ra明显高于激光处理组。Er:YAG激光或Nd:YAG激光在脱釉瓷表面均可作为酸蚀的可行处理方案。
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
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信