Comparison of translucency for different thicknesses of recent types of esthetic zirconia ceramics versus conventional ceramics … (in vitro study)

Esraa Al-Juaila , Essam Osman , Lucette Segaan , Mohammed Shrebaty , Ehab A. Farghaly
{"title":"Comparison of translucency for different thicknesses of recent types of esthetic zirconia ceramics versus conventional ceramics … (in vitro study)","authors":"Esraa Al-Juaila ,&nbsp;Essam Osman ,&nbsp;Lucette Segaan ,&nbsp;Mohammed Shrebaty ,&nbsp;Ehab A. Farghaly","doi":"10.1016/j.fdj.2018.05.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To compare the translucency of 6 different types of ceramic material using three different thicknesses.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Square shaped specimens were cut from different types of ceramics with variable translucencies (e.max CAD HT, e.max CAD LT, ultra-translucency zirconia, top-translucency zirconia, super-translucency zirconia and high-translucency zirconia). Total samples of 144 specimens were divided into 6 main groups according to material; each group was divided into 3 subgroups according to thickness used (0.4, 0.6 and 1 mm). Using spectrophotometer each specimen was tested three times against white and black background and the average was taken to calculate translucency parameter (TP).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Viewing the mean of translucency between studied groups, group EMHT (9.10 ± 1.45) scored the highest TP followed by group EMLT (8.36 ± 1.42) then group UTZ (6.66 ± 2.49), TTZ (6.25 ± 0.95), STZ (4.93 ± 0.96) and HTZ (4.83 ± 1.34) showed the lowest value. Each material showed a difference in mean value with different thicknesses. At 0.4 mm thickness one-way ANOVA revealed no significant difference between EMHT and UTZ (P = 0.942).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Glass ceramics showed higher TP values than crystalline based ceramics which means e.max is more translucent than zirconia. The thickness of the material has direct effect on its translucency. Ultra-translucency zirconia is the most recommended material to be used in conservative esthetic cases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100562,"journal":{"name":"Future Dental Journal","volume":"4 2","pages":"Pages 297-301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.fdj.2018.05.003","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2314718018300326","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the translucency of 6 different types of ceramic material using three different thicknesses.

Materials and methods

Square shaped specimens were cut from different types of ceramics with variable translucencies (e.max CAD HT, e.max CAD LT, ultra-translucency zirconia, top-translucency zirconia, super-translucency zirconia and high-translucency zirconia). Total samples of 144 specimens were divided into 6 main groups according to material; each group was divided into 3 subgroups according to thickness used (0.4, 0.6 and 1 mm). Using spectrophotometer each specimen was tested three times against white and black background and the average was taken to calculate translucency parameter (TP).

Results

Viewing the mean of translucency between studied groups, group EMHT (9.10 ± 1.45) scored the highest TP followed by group EMLT (8.36 ± 1.42) then group UTZ (6.66 ± 2.49), TTZ (6.25 ± 0.95), STZ (4.93 ± 0.96) and HTZ (4.83 ± 1.34) showed the lowest value. Each material showed a difference in mean value with different thicknesses. At 0.4 mm thickness one-way ANOVA revealed no significant difference between EMHT and UTZ (P = 0.942).

Conclusions

Glass ceramics showed higher TP values than crystalline based ceramics which means e.max is more translucent than zirconia. The thickness of the material has direct effect on its translucency. Ultra-translucency zirconia is the most recommended material to be used in conservative esthetic cases.

新型美观氧化锆陶瓷与传统陶瓷不同厚度的透光性比较(体外研究)
目的比较6种不同厚度陶瓷材料的透光性。材料与方法采用不同类型的不同透明度的陶瓷(e.max CAD HT、e.max CAD LT、超半透明氧化锆、顶半透明氧化锆、超半透明氧化锆和高半透明氧化锆)切割方形试样。144个标本按材质分为6个主要组;每组按所用厚度(0.4、0.6、1 mm)分为3个亚组。用分光光度计对每个样品在黑白背景下测试三次,取平均值计算半透明参数(TP)。ResultsViewing半透明的均值之间的研究团体,团体EMHT(9.10 ±1.45 )得分最高TP组EMLT紧随其后(8.36 ±1.42 )然后集团伍兹(6.66 ±2.49 ),TTZ(6.25 ±0.95 ),STZ(4.93 ±0.96 )和HTZ(4.83 ±1.34 )显示了最小值。每种材料的厚度不同,其平均值也不同。在0.4 mm厚度处,单因素方差分析显示EMHT与UTZ之间无显著差异(P = 0.942)。结论玻璃陶瓷的TP值高于结晶陶瓷,说明e.max比氧化锆更透明。材料的厚度对其透明度有直接影响。超半透明氧化锆是最推荐用于保守美学病例的材料。
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
×
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