Effect of chemical or mechanical finishing/polishing and immersion in staining solutions on the roughness, microhardness, and color stability of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramics.

Mauro Ga Brito, Flávia Lb Amaral, Cecília P Turssi, Roberta Tb Hofling, Fabiana Mg França
{"title":"Effect of chemical or mechanical finishing/polishing and immersion in staining solutions on the roughness, microhardness, and color stability of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramics.","authors":"Mauro Ga Brito,&nbsp;Flávia Lb Amaral,&nbsp;Cecília P Turssi,&nbsp;Roberta Tb Hofling,&nbsp;Fabiana Mg França","doi":"10.54589/aol.36/2/86","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the manufacture of ceramic restorations there is an important step of finishing and polishing and the effects of different types of these procedures on the surface characteristics of ceramics are not known for sure.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the effects of various surface treatments and immersion in coloring substances on the roughness, microhardness, and color stability of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramics.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>The ceramics used were lithium disilicate reinforced with zirconium dioxide (Suprinity), lithium disilicate (E.max) or leucite (Empress). They were subjected to two surface treatments: glazing (group G) (n=20) or mechanical polishing (group P) (n=20). Then they were divided into two subgroups (n=10) to be treated with the staining substance (coffee or water). Roughness, microhardness and color were measured before and after treatment. Data were subjected to analysis of variance and multiple comparisons were performed with Tukey tests at 5% significance level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Roughness was lower in all tested ceramics after polishing than after glazing. Microhardness was the same for polished and glazed E.max, higher in glazed than polished Empress, and higher in polished than glazed Suprinity. Analysis of the effects of glazing and polishing on the individual ceramics showed that the ΔE2000 and ΔWID data of the E.max ceramic subjected to polishing showed greater change. Mechanical polishing is a good option for surface treatment of monolithic ceramics.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Glazing was inferior and less satisfactory than polishing. Glazing generates changes that can lead to color instability.</p>","PeriodicalId":93853,"journal":{"name":"Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL","volume":"36 2","pages":"86-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/65/06/1852-4834-36-2-86.PMC10595054.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54589/aol.36/2/86","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

During the manufacture of ceramic restorations there is an important step of finishing and polishing and the effects of different types of these procedures on the surface characteristics of ceramics are not known for sure.

Aim: To evaluate the effects of various surface treatments and immersion in coloring substances on the roughness, microhardness, and color stability of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramics.

Materials and method: The ceramics used were lithium disilicate reinforced with zirconium dioxide (Suprinity), lithium disilicate (E.max) or leucite (Empress). They were subjected to two surface treatments: glazing (group G) (n=20) or mechanical polishing (group P) (n=20). Then they were divided into two subgroups (n=10) to be treated with the staining substance (coffee or water). Roughness, microhardness and color were measured before and after treatment. Data were subjected to analysis of variance and multiple comparisons were performed with Tukey tests at 5% significance level.

Results: Roughness was lower in all tested ceramics after polishing than after glazing. Microhardness was the same for polished and glazed E.max, higher in glazed than polished Empress, and higher in polished than glazed Suprinity. Analysis of the effects of glazing and polishing on the individual ceramics showed that the ΔE2000 and ΔWID data of the E.max ceramic subjected to polishing showed greater change. Mechanical polishing is a good option for surface treatment of monolithic ceramics.

Conclusion: Glazing was inferior and less satisfactory than polishing. Glazing generates changes that can lead to color instability.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

化学或机械精加工/抛光和浸渍在染色溶液中对CAD-CAM单片陶瓷的粗糙度、显微硬度和颜色稳定性的影响。
在陶瓷修复体的制造过程中,有一个重要的步骤是精加工和抛光,不同类型的这些程序对陶瓷表面特性的影响尚不确定。目的:评价不同表面处理和着色物质浸渍对CAD-CAM单片陶瓷的粗糙度、显微硬度和颜色稳定性的影响。材料和方法:使用的陶瓷是用二氧化锆(Suprinity)、二硅酸锂(E.max)或亮氨酸(Empress)增强的二硅酸锂。他们接受了两种表面处理:上釉(G组)(n=20)或机械抛光(P组)(n=20)。然后将他们分为两个亚组(n=10),用染色物质(咖啡或水)处理。在处理前后测量粗糙度、显微硬度和颜色。对数据进行方差分析,并在5%显著性水平下使用Tukey检验进行多重比较。结果:抛光后所有测试陶瓷的粗糙度均低于上釉后。抛光和上釉的E.max的显微硬度相同,上釉的硬度高于抛光的Empress,抛光的硬度高于上釉的Suprinity。对上釉和抛光对单个陶瓷的影响的分析表明,经过抛光的E.max陶瓷的ΔE2000和ΔWID数据显示出更大的变化。机械抛光是单片陶瓷表面处理的一个很好的选择。结论:玻璃化效果较差,不如抛光。玻璃化会产生可能导致颜色不稳定的变化。
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
CiteScore
1.00
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