C A Jurado, K Arndt, F X Azpiazu-Flores, F Faddoul, R França, N G Fischer, H Watanabe
{"title":"Evaluation of Glazing and Polishing Systems for Novel Chairside CAD/CAM Lithium Disilicate and Virgilite Crowns.","authors":"C A Jurado, K Arndt, F X Azpiazu-Flores, F Faddoul, R França, N G Fischer, H Watanabe","doi":"10.2341/23-017-L","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of glazing, two zirconia, and two lithium disilicate polishing systems on surface roughness of a CAD/CAM lithium disilicate and virgilite ceramic with atomic force microscopy (AFM) and visual assessment performed by dental students and faculty.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>Sixty maxillary right central incisor crowns made of a novel chairside CAD/CAM lithium disilicate and virgilite (CEREC Tessera) were milled for glazing and polishing. The crowns were divided into six groups: no polishing/glazing provided (NoP/G); glazed (GZ); glazed and polished with Brasseler Dialite LD Lithium Disilicate (DiLD); glazed and polished with Meisinger Luster Lithium Disilicate (LuLD); glazed and polished with Brasseler Dialite ZR Zirconia (DiZR); and glazed and polished with Meisinger Luster Zirconia (LuZR). Surfaces were scanned with AFM to measure roughness (Ra) and root mean square roughness (Rq) and generate micrographs. Crowns were visually assessed by 10 dental students and 10 dental school faculty members to determine clinical acceptableness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Glazing and all polishing kits significantly reduced Ra and Rq compared to no polishing/glazing. No significant Ra differences were found between glazing and all polishing kits (p>0.05). DiZR significantly reduced Rq compared to other groups (p<0.05). Visual assessment showed that GZ, LuLD, and DiZR were the most clinically acceptable crowns.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Polishing and glazing considerably improve the surface smoothness of maxillary central incisor crowns fabricated out of a chairside CAD/CAM lithium disilicate and virgilite ceramic. Altogether, zirconia polishing systems provided smoother and more clinically acceptable surfaces than the lithium disilicate kits.</p>","PeriodicalId":19502,"journal":{"name":"Operative dentistry","volume":" ","pages":"689-699"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operative dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2341/23-017-L","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of glazing, two zirconia, and two lithium disilicate polishing systems on surface roughness of a CAD/CAM lithium disilicate and virgilite ceramic with atomic force microscopy (AFM) and visual assessment performed by dental students and faculty.
Methods and materials: Sixty maxillary right central incisor crowns made of a novel chairside CAD/CAM lithium disilicate and virgilite (CEREC Tessera) were milled for glazing and polishing. The crowns were divided into six groups: no polishing/glazing provided (NoP/G); glazed (GZ); glazed and polished with Brasseler Dialite LD Lithium Disilicate (DiLD); glazed and polished with Meisinger Luster Lithium Disilicate (LuLD); glazed and polished with Brasseler Dialite ZR Zirconia (DiZR); and glazed and polished with Meisinger Luster Zirconia (LuZR). Surfaces were scanned with AFM to measure roughness (Ra) and root mean square roughness (Rq) and generate micrographs. Crowns were visually assessed by 10 dental students and 10 dental school faculty members to determine clinical acceptableness.
Results: Glazing and all polishing kits significantly reduced Ra and Rq compared to no polishing/glazing. No significant Ra differences were found between glazing and all polishing kits (p>0.05). DiZR significantly reduced Rq compared to other groups (p<0.05). Visual assessment showed that GZ, LuLD, and DiZR were the most clinically acceptable crowns.
Conclusion: Polishing and glazing considerably improve the surface smoothness of maxillary central incisor crowns fabricated out of a chairside CAD/CAM lithium disilicate and virgilite ceramic. Altogether, zirconia polishing systems provided smoother and more clinically acceptable surfaces than the lithium disilicate kits.
期刊介绍:
Operative Dentistry is a refereed, international journal published bi-monthly and distributed to subscribers in over 50 countries. In 2012, we printed 84 articles (672 pages). Papers were submitted by authors from 45 countries, in the categories of Clinical Research, Laboratory Research, Clinical Techniques/Case Presentations and Invited Papers, as well as Editorials and Abstracts.
One of the strong points of our journal is that our current publication time for accepted manuscripts is 4 to 6 months from the date of submission. Clinical Techniques/Case Presentations have a very quick turnaround time, which allows for very rapid publication of clinical based concepts. We also provide color for those papers that would benefit from its use.
The journal does not accept any advertising but you will find postings for faculty positions. Additionally, the journal also does not rent, sell or otherwise allow its subscriber list to be used by any other entity