Navigation auf zora.uzh.ch

Search

ZORA (Zurich Open Repository and Archive)

Wear analysis and topographical properties of monolithic zirconia and CoCr against human enamel after polishing and glazing procedures

Fontolliet, Alain; Al-Haj Husain, Nadin; Özcan, Mutlu (2020). Wear analysis and topographical properties of monolithic zirconia and CoCr against human enamel after polishing and glazing procedures. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 105:103712.

Abstract

PURPOSE
Intraoral adjustments of monolithic zirconia (MZ) necessitate intraoral grinding and polishing procedures, causing surface topography changes. The effect of various polishing and glazing procedures on surface roughness, topographical and phase changes of CoCr compared to zirconia, and assessment of the wear of the opposing dentition has been evaluated in this study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
One group of square Cobaltchromium (CoCr) and four groups of sintered and polished zirconia specimens (12 × 12 × 1mm) were fabricated (N = 5, n = 8) using Cobaltchromium or yttria-stabilized zirconia (ZrO2, Y2O3) blocks (ZENTROSTAR Zr Translucent; Wieland Dental + Technik). Each of the four zirconia groups was treated differently, one group was glazed (G), one was left unglazed (UG), two groups were polished, one using silicon carbide polishers (BG) and one with diamond-impregnated ceramic polisher kit (CG). All specimens were thereafter subjected to chewing simulation using enamel cusps (1'200'000 cycles, 49N force and 1.67 Hz loading frequency). Topographical changes were evaluated considering (a) weight (digital scale), (b) volume loss (digital microscope), (c) vertical height loss (digital microscope), (d) surface roughness (Ra, profilometer), and (e) mean roughness depth (Rz, profilometer). In addition the volume loss (digital microscope) of the used corresponding enamel cusps was measured. The surface roughness, topographical changes and antagonist wear of enamel cusps were measured. Statistical analysis was performed using the statical software R and the kruskal-wallis rank sum test and posthoc pairwise comparisons (a = 0.05).
RESULTS
The mean surface roughness (μm) difference (ΔRa) was lowest for UG (-0.014 ± 0.007) and the highest for CG (-0.806 ± 0.172) (UG$^{a}$ < CoCr$^{b}$ < BG$^{c}$ < G$^{a,d}$ < CG$^{e}$). UG showed the lowest surface peak roughness (μm) difference (ΔRz) -0.316 ± 0.084 and CG the highest (-3.691 ± 0.369) (UG$^{a}$ < CoCr$^{b}$ < BG$^{c}$ < G$^{a,d}$ < CG$^{e}$). Material weight loss (ΔW) ranged between -0.005 ± 0.0001 and -0.000 ± 0.000 g (CoCr$^{a}$ < UG$^{a,b}$ < CG$^{b}$ < BG$^{b}$ < G$^{b}$) compared to baseline, while the volume loss (ΔV) was between -21 ± 52 × 10$^{6}$ and 58 ± 36 × 10$^{6}$ μm3 (CoCr$^{a}$ < BG$^{a}$ < UG$^{a}$ < CG$^{a}$ < G$^{a}$). The vertical height loss (ΔVH) was highest for UG (-12.067 ± 11.624) and lowest for G -0.033 ± 0.034 μm (G$^{a}$ < CoCr$^{a,b}$ < CG$^{c}$ < BG$^{a,c,d}$ < UG$^{a,b,d}$). As for the volume loss (ΔV) of the corresponding enamel cusps, no significant differences could be measured (BG$^{a}$ < UG$^{a}$ < G$^{a}$ < CG$^{a}$ < CoCr$^{a}$), therefore surface treatment did not affect the wear of the enamel antagonist.
CONCLUSION
CoCr and highly polished monolitic zirconia produced less surface roughness and similar antagonist wear compared to glazed or unglazed zirconia. CoCr and highly polished monolitic zirconia can be considered as a good choice regarding the mechanical wear behaviour of materials and their corresponding enamel antagonist.

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Physical Sciences > Biomaterials
Physical Sciences > Biomedical Engineering
Physical Sciences > Mechanics of Materials
Language:English
Date:May 2020
Deposited On:21 Jan 2021 13:09
Last Modified:10 Sep 2024 03:40
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:1751-6161
OA Status:Green
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103712
PubMed ID:32279854

Metadata Export

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
12 citations in Web of Science®
12 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

96 downloads since deposited on 21 Jan 2021
35 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Authors, Affiliations, Collaborations

Similar Publications