An In vitro Evaluation to Compare the Surface Roughness of Glazed, Reglazed and Chair Side Polished Surfaces of Dental Porcelain

Effect of toothbrushing on surface roughness, gloss, and topography of polished and glazed ultra-translucent zirconia

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the effect of toothbrushing cycles on surface roughness (Ra), gloss (GU), and morphology of two zirconia finishing and polishing protocols.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An ultra-translucent zirconia disc was sectioned into rectangular plates (12 mm × 7 mm × 3 mm) and divided into two groups according to the polishing and finishing system used (diamond rubber abrasive/DRA or glazing/GLA). Bovine enamel (BEN) plates with the same dimensions were used as a Control. Specimens of zirconia and enamel were analyzed for Ra and GU (n = 11) and surface morphology by scanning electron microscopy (n = 3) before toothbrushing (baseline) and after 15,000 and 30,000 toothbrushing cycles. Ra and GU data were analyzed by ANOVA two-way and post-hoc Tukey's test (α = 0.05), while the surface morphology was analyzed qualitatively.

RESULTS

The Ra decreased significantly after 30,000 toothbrushing cycles for DRA and GLA zirconia ceramics. DRA showed a higher GU at the baseline, after 15,000 and 30,000 toothbrushing cycles than GLA and BEN. Toothbrushing polished the zirconia, creating a smooth surface, while no changes were observed for BEN.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in toothbrushing cycles (30,000) changed the surface roughness of DRA and GLA zirconia ceramics. DRA zirconia presented the highest GU, which did not change with toothbrushing.

The Surface Roughness of Contemporary Indirect CAD/CAM Restorative Materials That Are Glazed and Chair-Side-Finished/Polished

The surface roughness (Ra) of indirect computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)-fabricated dental restorations is crucial for their long-term durability. This study intended to evaluate the Ra of five different types of contemporary indirect CAD/CAM restorative materials with varying compositions that were glazed and finished/polished. A total of 75 specimens, disc-shaped (10 mm × 2 mm), were obtained from five materials (n = 15) (Tetric CAD, IPS e.max CAD, IPS e.max ZirCAD, CELTRA Duo, and Vita Enamic) and fabricated by CAD/CAM. One of the two surfaces for each specimen was subjected to glazing, while the other surface was subjected to finishing/polishing. The Ra of the two surfaces in micrometers (μm) was evaluated using a Profilometer, while the surface topography was examined using a scanning electron microscope. Using SPSS, the Kruskal-Wallis, post hoc Conover, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to statistically evaluate the data. A comparison of the Ra for the finished/polished surfaces of the five test materials showed significant differences (p < 0.0001). Among the finished/polished surfaces, the mean rank values of Vita Enamic were significantly higher than the other four test materials (p < 0.0001). A comparison of the Ra of glazed surfaces among the five study materials revealed significant differences (p < 0.0001). The Ra for the IPS e.max ZirCAD material was significantly higher than the rest of the four materials (p < 0.001). A comparison of the Ra for two types of surface conditioning within each of the five test materials showed a significant difference (p < 0.05). Only for IPS e.max ZirCAD was the Ra of the glazed surface significantly higher than the finished/polished surface (p < 0.0001). Significant variations in the surface roughness (Ra) were exhibited between the finished/polished and glazed surfaces of the five test materials. Hybrid ceramics showed the highest Ra values for the finished/polished surfaces, and zirconia exhibited the highest Ra values among the glazed surfaces among the tested materials. The Ra values of either finished/polished or glazed surfaces of the test materials were within the clinically acceptable range (0.2-0.5 μm), except for the glazed surface of the zirconia ceramics (0.84 μm).

Impact of polishing system on surface roughness of different ceramic surfaces after various pretreatments and bracket debonding

OBJECTIVE

Evaluating various polishing methods after bracket debonding and excessive attachment material removal for different ceramics and pretreatments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Zirconia (ZrO2), leucite (LEU) and lithium disilicate (LiSi) specimens were pretreated with a) silica coated alumina particles (CoJet); LEU and LiSi additionally with b) hydrofluoric acid (HF), c) Monobond Etch&Prime (MEP), d) silicium carbide grinder (SiC) before bracket bonding, shearing off, ARI evaluation, excessive attachment material removal and polishing with i) Sof-Lex Discs (Soflex), ii) polishing paste (Paste), iii) polishing set (Set). Before/after polishing surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a profilometer. Martens hardness parameter were also assessed.

RESULTS

Irrespective of pretreatment Ra of LEU increased the most, followed by LiSi and ZrO2 (p < 0.001, SiC: p = 0.012), in accordance with the measured Martens hardness parameter. CoJet/SiC caused greater roughness as HF/MEP (p < 0.001). The ZrO2 surface was rougher after polishing with Paste/Set (p < 0.001; p = 0.047). Ra improved in the LEU/CoJet, LEU/SiC and LiSi/SiC groups with Soflex/Set (p < 0.001), in the LiSi/CoJet and LEU/HF groups by Soflex (p = 0.003, p < 0.001) and worsened by Paste (p = 0.017, p < 0.001). Polishing of HF or MEP pretreated LiSi with Set increased Ra (p = 0.001, p < 0.001), so did Paste in the LEU/MEP group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Paste couldn't improve the surfaces. Soflex was the only method decreasing Ra on rough surfaces and not causing roughness worsening. Polishing of LEU/LiSi after MEP, LEU after HF pretreatment doesn´t seem to have any benefit.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

To avoid long-term damage to ceramic restorations, special attention should be paid to the polishing method after orthodontic treatment.

Ceramic Materials for Biomedical Applications: An Overview on Properties and Fabrication Processes

A growing interest in creating advanced biomaterials with specific physical and chemical properties is currently being observed. These high-standard materials must be capable to integrate into biological environments such as the oral cavity or other anatomical regions in the human body. Given these requirements, ceramic biomaterials offer a feasible solution in terms of mechanical strength, biological functionality, and biocompatibility. In this review, the fundamental physical, chemical, and mechanical properties of the main ceramic biomaterials and ceramic nanocomposites are drawn, along with some primary related applications in biomedical fields, such as orthopedics, dentistry, and regenerative medicine. Furthermore, an in-depth focus on bone-tissue engineering and biomimetic ceramic scaffold design and fabrication is presented.

Influence Of Orthodontic Brackets Design And Surface Properties On The Cariogenic Streptococcus mutans Adhesion

Objective

To compare the surface properties of self-ligating metallic (SLM), ceramic esthetic, and conventional metallic (CM) brackets, and evaluate the adhesion of Streptococcus mutans biofilms to their surface, attempting to interpret the correlation between bracket type and enamel demineralization from a microbiological perspective.

Materials and methods

Twenty-two brackets of each group were used. The brackets’ surface roughness was defined and the bacterial adhesion was performed using the strain S. mutans ATCC25175 with 8 h or 24 h of incubation time. The total bacterial adhesion (TBA) of biofilms was assessed using optical density (OD) methodology. To quantify bacteria viability (BV), the colony forming units (CFU) were counted. A scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observation of biofilms was also performed. Results: Ceramic brackets exhibited significantly higher roughness (0.304) compared to CM (0.090) and SLM (0.067) ones (C > CM = SLM). The data obtained with the TBA and BV tests showed that S. mutans biofilm formed on bracket groups exhibited similar results for both incubation periods. From the SEM images it is possible to observe that biofilm structure formed for 24 h was denser than that for 8 h of incubation with significantly more aggregates and cells for three groups.

Conclusion

This in vitro study suggests that despite the higher surface roughness of ceramic brackets, this alone does not influence the adhesion of the S. mutans biofilms.

Clinical relevance

From a microbiological perspective, the bracket's design may be more relevant than its surface roughness with respect to the adhesion of cariogenic bacteria biofilm with potential risk to dental enamel integrity.