Go to the content. | Move to the navigation | Go to the site search | Go to the menu | Contacts | Accessibility

| Create Account

Ludovichetti, Francesco Saverio (2019) CAD/CAM monolithic materials: wear resistance and abrasiveness, and the effect of grinding and polishing on their roughness and fracture resistance. [Ph.D. thesis]

Full text disponibile come:

[img]PDF Document - Updated Version
Thesis not accessible until 14 March 2021 for intellectual property related reasons.
Visibile to: nobody

13Mb

Abstract (italian or english)

This thesis consists of two studies, both investigating the computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) monolithic materials.
First study. Aim. The wear resistance and abrasiveness of Lava Ultimate, Vita Enamic, Vita Suprinity, IPS e.max CAD, and Lava Plus, as well as some properties that might be related to, were analyzed. Methods. Specimens from these materials had their roughness, hardness, and coefficient of friction evaluated, respectively in confocal microscope, microdurometer, and tribometer. The 2-body wear test, wherein the materials acted as abraders and, together with bovine enamel, also as antagonists, was also carried out. The wear rate was determined with surface profilometer and the worn surfaces were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results. Vita Enamic and Lava Ultimate showed the highest roughness, whereas IPS e.max CAD and Vita Suprinity, the lowest. The hardness result was Lava Plus > (Vita Suprinity=IPS e.max CAD) > Vita Enamic >Lava Ultimate. Lava Ultimate exhibited a higher coefficient of friction than IPS e.max CAD and Lava Plus. Lava Plus and IPS e.max CAD showed significantly higher potential to wear Lava Ultimate. These two materials, together with Vita Suprinity, provided the highest wear of enamel and Vita Enamic. Vita Suprinity and IPS e.max CAD exhibited the highest wear against Lava Plus, and the inverse also occurred. Vita Enamic and Lava Ultimate were among the materials that caused the lowest wear of enamel and all other evaluated materials. Conclusion. The nanofilled composite resin and polymer-infiltrated ceramic were more antagonist-friendly (whether enamel or CAD-CAM material) than glass-ceramics and zirconia. Care should be taken when selecting the material that will contact mainly with glass-ceramics. Hardness should also be considered when selecting a material.

Second study. Aim. To evaluate the effect of grinding and polishing on the roughness and fracture resistance of Lava Ultimate, Vita Enamic, Vita Suprinity, and IPS e.max CAD, submitted to mechanical aging. Methods. Disks from these materials were analyzed for roughness: 1) after polishing with silicon carbide papers (Lava Ultimate and Vita Enamic) or glazing (IPS e.max CAD and Vita Suprinity) (control); 2) after grinding with 30-μm grit diamond rotary instruments; 3) and after grinding and polishing with the polishing kit Ceramiste Polishers. For fracture resistance, a simplified tri-layer model consisting of restorative disk, epoxy resin disk, and a steel ring was used. The bonded tri-layer disks received the same conditions described for the roughness analysis. Half of the specimens underwent mechanical aging for 1×106 cycles. All specimens were loaded until failure. The Weibull modulus was calculated. Results. Among the control groups, no significant difference was found between the IPS e.max CAD and Vita Suprinity and between the Lava Ultimate and Vita Enamic, which were rougher than the glass-ceramic materials. After grinding, this behavior was maintained, except for the Vita Enamic, whose roughness was similar to that of the IPS e.max CAD. After polishing, the Vita Enamic showed the highest roughness, whereas the other materials were not statistically different. IPS e.max CAD and Vita Suprinity showed the lowest roughness in the control groups. For Lava Ultimate and Vita Enamic, polishing provided the lowest roughness. Grinding followed or not by polishing, and mechanical aging, did not adversely affect fracture resistance or the reliability of the materials. Conclusions. Polishing did not recover the initial roughness of the glass-ceramic materials. Fracture resistance was not affected by grinding, followed or not by polishing, even after mechanical aging.


EPrint type:Ph.D. thesis
Tutor:Garcia Fonseca, Renata and Granozzi, Gaetano
Ph.D. course:Ciclo 30 > Corsi 30 > SCIENZA E INGEGNERIA DEI MATERIALI E DELLE NANOSTRUTTURE
Data di deposito della tesi:15 February 2019
Anno di Pubblicazione:01 February 2019
Key Words:: CAD-CAM. Ceramics. Composite Resins. Dental Restoration Wear. Physical Properties. Hardness. Friction. Occlusal Adjustment. Dental Polishing. Material Resistance.
Settori scientifico-disciplinari MIUR:Area 03 - Scienze chimiche > CHIM/05 Scienza e tecnologia dei materiali polimerici
Struttura di riferimento:Dipartimenti > Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche
Codice ID:11796
Depositato il:06 Nov 2019 13:47
Simple Metadata
Full Metadata
EndNote Format

Bibliografia

I riferimenti della bibliografia possono essere cercati con Cerca la citazione di AIRE, copiando il titolo dell'articolo (o del libro) e la rivista (se presente) nei campi appositi di "Cerca la Citazione di AIRE".
Le url contenute in alcuni riferimenti sono raggiungibili cliccando sul link alla fine della citazione (Vai!) e tramite Google (Ricerca con Google). Il risultato dipende dalla formattazione della citazione.

1. Van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012; 28: 3-12. Cerca con Google

2. Sajjad A. Computer-assisted design/computer-assisted manufacturing systems: A revolution in restorative dentistry. Case Report. 2016; 16(1): 96-9. Cerca con Google

3. Sannino G, Germano F, Arcuri L, Bigelli E, Arcuri C, Barlattani A. CEREC CAD/CAM Chairside System. Oral Implantol (Rome). 2015;7(3): 57-70. Cerca con Google

4. Li RWK, Chow TW and Matinlinna JP. Ceramic dental biomaterials and CAD/CAM technology: state of the art. J. Prosthodont. 2014; 58 (4): 208–16. Cerca con Google

5. Badawy R, El-Mowafy O, Tam LE. Fracture toughness of chairside CAD/CAM materials - Alternative loading approach for compact tension test. Dent Mater. 2016; 32(7): 847-52. Cerca con Google

6. Fasbinder DJ, Dennison JB, Heys D, Neiva G. A clinical evaluation of chairside lithium disilicate CAD/CAM crowns: a two-year report. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010; 2: 10S- 4S. Cerca con Google

7. Weyhrauch M, Igiel C, Scheller H, Weibrich G, Lehmann KM. Fracture Strength of Monolithic All-Ceramic Crowns on Titanium Implant Abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016 Mar-Apr;31(2):304-9. Cerca con Google

8. A. Della Bona, P.H. Corazza, Y. Zhang. Characterization of a polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network material Dent Mater, 30 (2014), pp. 564-569 Cerca con Google

9. Monteiro JB, Oliani MG, Guilardi LF, Prochnow C, Rocha Pereira GK, Bottino MA, de Melo RM, Valandro LF. Fatigue failure load of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic cemented to a dentin analogue: Effect of etching time and hydrofluoric acid concentration. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018 Jan;77:375-382. Cerca con Google

10. Krejci I, Daher R. Stress distribution difference between Lava Ultimate full crowns and IPS e.max CAD full crowns on a natural tooth and on tooth-shaped implant abutments. Odontology. 2017 Apr;105(2):254-256. Cerca con Google

11. Wang L, Liu Y, Wenjie S, Haliang F, Yongqing T, Zhizuo, M. Friction and wear behaviors of dental ceramics against natural tooth enamel. J Eur Ceram Soc 2012;32:2599-2606 Cerca con Google

12. Zandparsa R, El Huni RM, Hirayama H, Johnson MI. Effect of different dental ceramic systems on the wear of human enamel: An in vitro study J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Feb;115(2):230-7. Cerca con Google

13. D'Arcangelo C, Vanini L, Rondoni GD, De Angelis F. Wear properties of dental ceramics and porcelains compared with human enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Mar;115(3):350-5 Cerca con Google

14. Janyavula S, Lawson N, Cakir D, Beck P, Ramp LC, Burgess JO. The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Jan;109(1):22-9. Cerca con Google

15. Amer R, Kürklü D, Kateeb E, Seghi RR. Three-body wear potential of dental yttrium-stabilized zirconia ceramic after grinding, polishing, and glazing treatments. J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Nov;112(5):1151-5. Cerca con Google

16. Amer R, Kürklü D, Johnston W. Effect of simulated mastication on the surface roughness of three ceramic systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Aug;114(2):260-5. Cerca con Google

17. Ghazal M, Kern M. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2009 May;101(5):342-9. Cerca con Google

18. Freddo RA, Kapczinski MP, Kinast EJ, de Souza Junior OB, Rivaldo EG, da Fontoura Frasca LC. Wear Potential of Dental Ceramics and its Relationship with Microhardness and Coefficient of Friction. J Prosthodont. 2015 Aug 19. Cerca con Google

19. Schuh C, Kinast EJ, Mezzomo E, Kapczinski MP. Effect of glazed and polished surface finishes on the friction coefficient of two low-fusing ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93:245-252. Cerca con Google

20. Oh WS, Delong R, Anusavice KJ. Factors affecting enamel and ceramic wear: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:451-9. Cerca con Google

21. Suputtamongkol K, Wonglamsam A, Eiampongpaiboon T, Malla S, Anusavice KJ. Surface roughness resulting from wear of Lithia-disilicate-based posterior crowns. Wear 2010;269:317-322 Cerca con Google

22. Mair LH, Stolarski TA, Vowles RW, Lloyd CH. Wear: mechanisms, manifestations and measurement. Report of a workshop. J Dent 1996;24:141-148 Cerca con Google

23. Seghi RR, Denry IL, Rosenstiel SF. Relative fracture toughness and hardness of new dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:145-150 Cerca con Google

24. Heintze SD, Cavalleri A, Forjanic M, Zellweger G, Rousson V. Wear of ceramic and antagonist--a systematic evaluation of influencing factors in vitro. Dent Mater. 2008 Apr;24(4):433-49. Cerca con Google

25. Preis V, Grumser K, Schneider-Feyrer S, Behr M, Rosentritt M. Cycle-dependent in vitro wear performance of dental ceramics after clinical surface treatments. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016 Jan; 53:49-58. Cerca con Google

26. Lawson NC, Janyavula S, Syklawer S, McLaren EA, Burgess JO. Wear of enamel opposing zirconia and lithium disilicate after adjustment, polishing and glazing. J Dent. 2014 Dec;42(12):1586-91. Cerca con Google

27. Akar GC, Pekkan G, Çal E, Eskitaşçıoğlu G, Özcan M. Effects of surface-finishing protocols on the roughness, color change, and translucency of different ceramic systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Aug;112(2):314-21. Cerca con Google

Solo per lo Staff dell Archivio: Modifica questo record