Microstructural development during crystallization firing of a dental-grade nanostructured lithia-zirconia glass-ceramic

Finishing technique effect on strength of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two finishing techniques, glazing or polishing, in comparison with the as-cut condition, on the biaxial-flexural-strength (BFS) of a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (ZLS). Cylinders were milled from CAD/CAM blocks and sliced to obtain disc-shaped specimens (ISO6872:2015). Polished and glazed specimens were processed following the manufacturer's instructions. Thirty-three specimens were obtained for each condition and microstructural and BFS/fractographic characterizations were performed. BFS and roughness data were analyzed using Weibull statistics and ANOVA one-way with Tukey post-hoc test, respectively. While a rougher surface was observed for as-cut specimens, smoother surfaces were observed for polished and glazed ZLS at microscopical evaluation and confirmed through surface-roughness evaluation. X-ray spectra depicted a glass phase for all groups and characteristic metasilicate, lithium disilicate, and lithium phosphate peaks for the as-cut and polished specimens. Glazed specimens showed higher characteristic strength than polished and as-cut specimens, which did not differ significantly. While higher Weibull-modulus was observed for the polished than for the as-cut specimens, no statistically significant differences were noted between glazed and polished, and between glazed and as-cut specimens. ZLS presents higher strength when glazed, and polishing increases the structural reliability of the material relative to the as-cut condition. Both finishing techniques reduced surface roughness similarly.

A Critical Review of Dental Lithia-Based Glass-Ceramics

The purpose of this article is to review current understanding of lithia-based glass-ceramics and to identify future research needs for this class of dental materials in relation to novel compositions and fabrication methods. With rapid advances in material development and digital technology, time efficiency of dental workflow and fit accuracy of ceramic restorations are ever improving. Lithia-based glass-ceramics are at the forefront of this advance-new variants with more efficient fabrication routes are continually being introduced into the marketplace. Base glass composition, crystallization heat treatment, nucleant and coloration additives, and property gradation are some pertinent variables. The trend in fabrication is to move from CAD/CAM grinding of partially crystallized glass-ceramics to fully crystallized materials, thereby circumventing the need for postmachining firing altogether. In these endeavors, a better understanding of mechanical properties and evolving shaping technologies, such as ductile grinding, is paramount. Additive manufacturing and 3-dimensional printing methodologies offer a promising alternative to current CAD/CAM subtractive manufacturing routes. Challenges to the implementation of new technologies in efficient development and production of high-quality dental glass-ceramic prostheses are addressed.

Grasping the Lithium hype: Insights into modern dental Lithium Silicate glass-ceramics

OBJECTIVES

Lithium-based glass-ceramics are currently dominating the landscape of dental restorative ceramic materials, with new products taking the market by storm in the last years. Though, the difference among all these new and old products is not readily accessible for the practitioner, who faces the dilemma of reaching a blind choice or trusting manufacturers' marketing brochures. To add confusion, new compositions tend to wear material terminologies inherited from vanguard dental lithium disilicates, disregarding accuracy. Here we aim to characterize such materials for their microstructure, crystalline fraction, glass chemistry and mechanical properties.

METHODS

Eleven commercial dental lithium-based glass ceramics were evaluated: IPS e.max® CAD, IPS e.max® Press, Celtra® Duo, Suprinity® PC, Initial™ LiSi Press, Initial™ LiSi Block, Amber® Mill, Amber® Press, N!CE®, Obsidian® and CEREC Tessera™. The chemical composition of their base glasses was measured by X-Ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (XRF) and Inductive Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES), as well as the composition of their residual glass by subtracting the oxides bound in the crystallized fraction, characterized by X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) and Rietveld refinement, and quantified accurately using the G-factor method (QXRD). The crystallization behavior is revealed by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) curves. Elastic constants are provided from Resonant Ultrasound Spectroscopy (RUS) and the fracture toughness measured by the Ball-on-Three-Balls method (B3B- K Ic). The microstructure is revealed by field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM).

RESULTS

The base glasses showed a wide range of SiO₂ /Li₂O ratios, from 1.5 to 3.0, with the degree of depolymerization dropping from ½ to 2/3 of the initial connectivity. Materials contained Li₂SiO₃+Li₃PO₄, Li₂SiO₃+Li₃PO₄+Li₂Si₂O₅, Li₂Si₂O₅+Li₃PO₄+ Cristobalite and/or Quartz and Li₂Si₂O₅+Li₃ PO₄+LiAlSi₂O₆, in crystallinity degrees from 45 to 80 vol%. Crystalline phases could be traced to their crystallization peaks on the DSC curves. Pressable materials and IPS e.max® CAD were the only material showing micrometric phases, with N!CE® and Initial™ LiSi Block showing solely nanometric crystals, with the rest presenting a mixture of submicrometric and nanometric particles. Fracture toughness from 1.45 to 2.30 MPa√m were measured, with the linear correlation to crystalline fraction breaking down for submicrometric and nanometric crystal phases.

SIGNIFICANCE

Dental lithium-based silicate glass-ceramics cannot be all put in the same bag, as differences exist in chemical composition, microstructure, crystallinity and mechanical properties. Pressable materials still perform better mechanically than CAM/CAM blocks, which loose resistance to fracture when crystal phases enter the submicrometric and nanometric range.