Two-body wear behavior of human enamel versus monolithic zirconia, lithium disilicate, ceramometal and composite resin

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

PURPOSE. To investigate and compare the surface roughness (SR), weight and height of monolithic zirconia (MZ), ceramometal (CM), lithium disilicate glass ceramic (LD), composite resin (CR), and their antagonistic human teeth enamel.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. 32 disc shaped specimens for the four test materials (n=8) and 32 premolars were prepared and randomly divided. SR, weight and height of the materials and the antagonist enamel were recorded before and after subjecting the specimens to 240,000 wear-cycles (49 N/0.8 Hz/5°C/50°C). SR, height, weight, and digital microscopic qualitative evaluation were measured.
RESULTS. CM (0.23 + 0.08 μm) and LD (0.68 + 0.16 μm) exhibited the least and highest mean difference in the SR, respectively. ANOVA revealed significance (P=.001) between the materials for the SR. Paired T-Test showed significance (P<.05) for the pre- and post- SR for all the materials. For the antagonistic enamel, no significance (P=.987) was found between the groups. However, the pre- and post- SR values of all the enamel groups were significant (P<.05). Wear cycles had significant effect on enamel weight loss against all the materials (P<.05). CR and MZ showed the lowest and highest height loss of 0.14 mm and 0.46 mm, respectively.
CONCLUSION. MZ and CM are more resistant to SR against the enamel than LD and CR. Enamel worn against test materials showed similar SR. Significant variations in SR values for the tested materials (MZ, LD, CM, and CR) against the enamel were found. Wear simulation significantly affected the enamel weight loss against all the materials, and enamel antagonist against MZ and CM showed more height loss.
[ J Adv Prosthodont 2019;11:23-31]

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

PURPOSE. To investigate and compare the surface roughness (SR), weight and height of monolithic zirconia (MZ), ceramometal (CM), lithium disilicate glass ceramic (LD), composite resin (CR), and their antagonistic human teeth enamel.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. 32 disc shaped specimens for the four test materials (n=8) and 32 premolars were prepared and randomly divided. SR, weight and height of the materials and the antagonist enamel were recorded before and after subjecting the specimens to 240,000 wear-cycles (49 N/0.8 Hz/5°C/50°C). SR, height, weight, and digital microscopic qualitative evaluation were measured.
RESULTS. CM (0.23 + 0.08 μm) and LD (0.68 + 0.16 μm) exhibited the least and highest mean difference in the SR, respectively. ANOVA revealed significance (P=.001) between the materials for the SR. Paired T-Test showed significance (P<.05) for the pre- and post- SR for all the materials. For the antagonistic enamel, no significance (P=.987) was found between the groups. However, the pre- and post- SR values of all the enamel groups were significant (P<.05). Wear cycles had significant effect on enamel weight loss against all the materials (P<.05). CR and MZ showed the lowest and highest height loss of 0.14 mm and 0.46 mm, respectively.
CONCLUSION. MZ and CM are more resistant to SR against the enamel than LD and CR. Enamel worn against test materials showed similar SR. Significant variations in SR values for the tested materials (MZ, LD, CM, and CR) against the enamel were found. Wear simulation significantly affected the enamel weight loss against all the materials, and enamel antagonist against MZ and CM showed more height loss.
[ J Adv Prosthodont 2019;11:23-31]

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Preis V, "Wear performance of substructure ceramics and veneering porcelains" 27 : 796-804, 2011

2 Shimane T, "Wear of opposing teeth by posterior composite resins-evaluation of newly developed wear test methods" 29 : 713-720, 2010

3 Sripetchdanond J, "Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin : an in vitro study" 112 : 1141-1150, 2014

4 Clelland NL, "Wear of enamel opposing low-fusing and conventional ceramic restorative materials" 10 : 8-15, 2001

5 Heintze SD, "Wear of ceramic and antagonist-a systematic evaluation of influencing factors in vitro" 24 : 433-449, 2008

6 Mörmann WH, "Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials : two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness" 20 : 113-125, 2013

7 Mitov G, "Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures" 28 : 909-918, 2012

8 Mitov G, "Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures" 28 : 909-918, 2012

9 Stawarczyk B, "Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists" 71 : 102-112, 2013

10 Rosentritt M, "Two-body wear of dental porcelain and substructure oxide ceramics" 16 : 935-943, 2012

11 Hahnel S, "Two-body wear of artificial acrylic and composite resin teeth in relation to antagonist material" 101 : 269-278, 2009

12 Hmaidouch R, "Tooth wear against ceramic crowns in posterior region : a systematic literature review" 5 : 183-190, 2013

13 Janyavula S, "The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel" 109 : 22-29, 2013

14 Ho TK, "The effect of chewing simulation on surface roughness of resin composite when opposed by zirconia ceramic and lithium disilicate ceramic" 34 : e15-e24, 2018

15 Araujo NS, "Survival of all-ceramic restorations after a minimum follow-up of five years : A systematic review" 47 : 395-405, 2016

16 Ren L, "Sliding contact fracture of dental ceramics : Principles and validation" 10 : 3243-3253, 2014

17 Zhang YR, "Review of research on the mechanical properties of the human tooth" 6 : 61-69, 2014

18 Esquivel-Upshaw J, "Randomized, controlled clinical trial of bilayer ceramic and metal-ceramic crown performance" 22 : 166-173, 2013

19 Etman MK, "Quantitative measurement of tooth and ceramic wear : in vivo study" 21 : 245-252, 2008

20 Borgia E, "Quality and survival of direct light-activated composite resin restorations in posterior teeth:A 5- to 20-year retrospective longitudinal study" 2017

21 Xia J, "New model to explain tooth wear with implications for microwear formation and diet reconstruction" 112 : 10669-10672, 2015

22 Lucas PW, "Mechanisms and causes of wear in tooth enamel : implications for hominin diets" 10 : 20120923-, 2013

23 Fischer TE, "Influence of fracture toughness on the wear resistance of yttria-doped zirconium oxide" 72 : 252-257, 1989

24 Passos SP, "In vitro wear behavior of zirconia opposing enamel : a systematic review" 23 : 593-601, 2014

25 Heintze SD, "How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods" 22 : 712-734, 2006

26 Wang L, "Friction and wear behaviors of dental ceramics against natural tooth enamel" 32 : 2599-2606, 2012

27 Yesil ZD, "Evaluation of the wear resistance of new nanocomposite resin restorative materials" 99 : 435-443, 2008

28 Vieira AC, "Evaluation of the surface roughness in dental ceramics submitted to different finishing and polishing methods" 13 : 290-295, 2013

29 Zhao X, "Effectiveness of resin-based materials against erosive and abrasive enamel wear" 21 : 463-468, 2017

30 Zandparsa R, "Effect of different dental ceramic systems on the wear of human enamel : An in vitro study" 115 : 230-237, 2016

31 Stawarczyk B, "Comparison of four monolithic zirconia materials with conventional ones: Contrast ratio, grain size, four-point flexural strength and two-body wear" 59 : 128-138, 2016

32 Chun KJ, "Comparative study of mechanical properties of dental restorative materials and dental hard tissues in compressive loads" 5 : 1758736014555246-, 2014

33 Mundhe K, "Clinical study to evaluate the wear of natural enamel antagonist to zirconia and metal ceramic crowns" 114 : 358-363, 2015

34 Denry I, "Ceramics for dental applications : A review" 3 : 351-368, 2010

35 Rosentritt M, "Approach for valuating the influence of laboratory simulation" 25 : 348-352, 2009

36 Lohbauer U, "Antagonist wear of monolithic zirconia crowns after 2 years" 21 : 1165-1172, 2017

37 Arsecularatne JA, "An in vitro study of the wear behaviour of dental composites" 2 : 102-113, 2016

38 Bartlett D, "A retrospective audit of the outcome of composites used to restore worn teeth" 223 : 33-36, 2017