Comparative evaluation of natural enamel wear against polished yitrium tetragonal zirconia and polished lithium disilicate - An in vivo study

Prospective clinical study of enamel wear caused by monolithic zirconia resin-bonded inlay-retained and wing-retained fixed partial dentures over 5 years

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively evaluate the wear of posterior zirconia resin-bonded fixed partial dentures (RBFPDs) with polished occlusal surfaces and their natural enamel antagonists compared to contralateral controls in an enamel-enamel contact over 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In six patients with either an inlay- or wing-retained RBFPD made of monolithic 3 mol% yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (3Y-TZP), wear was evaluated indirectly using baseline and annual polyvinyl siloxane impressions. Resulting gypsum models were digitized and aligned by unchanged surface areas. Wear was analyzed by depth and area. For each parameter, descriptive statistics were used to express the degree of wear observed at yearly intervals for each group. A linear mixed regression analysis was performed to compare the enamel opposing 3Y-TZP group and the enamel-enamel controls at tooth level. All statistical tests were conducted at the 5% significance level.

RESULTS

After 5 years, the mean enamel wear depth of teeth opposing 3Y-TZP was 77 μm, compared to 54 μm for control teeth. No wear was observed on the 3Y-TZP RBFPDs. Maximum enamel wear depth and wear area were 229 μm and 9 mm², respectively, for teeth opposing 3Y-TZP, and 135 μm and 5 mm² for control teeth. Significant differences in mean enamel wear depth emerged after 2 years of observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Polished 3Y-TZP caused more enamel wear than natural antagonists over 5 years, but the wear remained within the range reported for other commonly used indirect restorative materials.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The clinical use of polished 3Y-TZP restorations appears to be justified in terms of natural antagonist wear behavior.

Tribological aspects of enamel wear caused by zirconia and lithium disilicate: A meta-narrative review

The contact between enamel and an antagonist surface is the primary factor in tooth wear. Loss of tooth structure can cause changes in occlusion, chewing functionality, dental sensitivity, and appearance. However, enamel wear caused by opposing restorations is multifactorial and there is a lack of consensus regarding its behavior. This meta-narrative review assesses the multiple factors that affect enamel wear when using two common indirect restorative materials, lithium disilicate and zirconia. PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and CINAHL databases were searched using keywords "zirconia," "lithium disilicate," "antagonistic tooth wear," and "enamel wear" to identify studies related to enamel wear caused by zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations. The Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) publication standard was used to report this meta-narrative literature review. Four broad categories of influencing factors were identified and reviewed: (1) mechanical and physical properties, (2) wear behavior and microstructural characteristics, (3) surface state, and (4) environmental factors. We conclude that well-polished zirconia is a more favorable indirect restorative material than lithium disilicate in terms of tribology because of its microstructure and surface integrity during wear. This review will enable clinicians to better comprehend the intricate nature of tooth wear caused by dental restorations.

A two-year clinical trial of enamel wear opposing 5Y-TZP and lithium disilicate crowns

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Clinical information on enamel wear opposing 5 mol% yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (5Y-TZP) or lithium disilicate crowns is lacking. Moreover, the effect of surface roughness on the wear of enamel antagonists remains unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical study was to quantify the vertical wear and total volume of wear while also measuring the surface roughness of antagonists at 6-month intervals over 2 years.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A tooth-supported first molar 5Y-TZP Lava Esthetic Fluorescent Zirconia crown or an IPS e.max CAD lithium disilicate crown was randomly provided for 24 participants (n=12). The contralateral first molar and opposite teeth were the natural enamel controls. The crowns were fabricated using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology and then polished. The data were gathered every 6 months at recall appointments with an intraoral scanner and a polyvinyl siloxane impression. A 3-dimensional (3D) comparative software program was used to measure the maximum vertical and volume loss on opposing enamel, as well as on the enamel control on the opposite side of the mouth. The surface of epoxy resin replicas was analyzed using a scanning electron microscope. The surface roughness of the cusp replica was measured with a 3D laser microscope. The crown's antagonist enamel and natural enamel wear were compared using a 2-way repeated measure ANOVA (α=.05).

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in the average volume loss between the crown's antagonist enamel (ZTE 0.042 ±0.005 mm3, LTE 0.048 ±0.006 mm3) and the enamel control (ZCE 0.046 ±0.004 mm3, LCE 0.050 ±0.005 mm3) (P>.05). No significant difference was found in surface roughness between the crown's antagonist enamel (antagonist enamel of zirconia group [ZTE] 0.7 ±0.3 µm, antagonist enamel of lithium disilicate group [LTE] 0.6 ±0.3 µm) and the enamel control (enamel control of zirconia group [ZCE] 0.7 ±0.3 µm, enamel control of lithium disilicate group [LCE] 0.5 ±0.2 µm) in both zirconia and lithium disilicate groups (P>.05). Also, no correlation was found between the amount of wear and the roughness of the surface. The wear patterns observed on the opposing enamel surfaces of the monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate materials were found to be similar to those seen on natural enamel.

CONCLUSIONS

A 2-year clinical investigation found that polished lithium disilicate and 5Y-TZP crowns did not affect enamel wear more than enamel against enamel, contrary to laboratory studies. Another finding revealed that surface roughness did not significantly affect wear.

An evaluation of antagonist enamel wear opposing full-coverage zirconia crowns versus other ceramics full-coverage crowns and natural enamel - An umbrella review

AIM

The aim of this umbrella review was to systematically review the systematic reviews on antagonist enamel wear opposing zirconia crowns compared to other ceramics and natural enamel.

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

This was an umbrella review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of PubMed, Cochrane Central, EBSCOhost, and Google Scholar search engines for articles published from January 1, 2013, to January 1, 2023, was conducted using keywords "enamel wear," "zirconia," "feldspathic," "dental ceramics," and "Y-TZP" to identify systematic reviews on antagonist enamel wear opposing zirconia crowns compared to other ceramics and natural enamel.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

Qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 86 articles were obtained through electronic search, of which four articles were selected after abstract screening that met the inclusion criteria for evaluating antagonist enamel wear. As compared to feldspathic groups, zirconia had substantially less antagonist wear, while surface polishing exhibited less enamel wear than glazing. Because of the heterogeneity in study design, measurement methods, and outcome variables, a meta-analysis was not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Over time, the opposing enamel wear caused by polished monolithic zirconia will be either equal to or less than that of natural enamel wear. Polished monolithic zirconia also maintains lower values of enamel wear compared to metal ceramics, feldspathic porcelains, and lithium disilicate.

Antagonist enamel tooth wear produced by different dental ceramic systems: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the amount of enamel tooth wear induced by different antagonistic ceramic crown materials in the posterior area within a follow-up period up to 24 months in function. A network meta-analysis was performed to assess the effect of the materials on the mean vertical loss (MVL) of the antagonist enamel tooth surface.

DATA

Main search terms used in combination: ceramic, dental materials, metal ceramic, tooth wear and dental enamel.

SOURCES

An electronic search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL plus hand-searching.

STUDY SELECTION

Eligibility criteria included clinical studies reporting on MVL on antagonist's tooth up to 24 months following the permanent crown placement. From a total of 5697 articles, 7 studies reporting on 261 crowns for 177 subjects with 3 ceramic materials (Lithium disilicate, metal-ceramic, monolithic zirconia) were included. Among all, metal-ceramic and zirconia caused significantly higher enamel tooth wear on antagonist teeth, representing 82.5 µm [54.4; 110.6]) and 40.1 µm [22.2; 58.0]) more MVL than natural teeth group. In contrast, lithium disilicate showed only 5.0 µm [-48.2; 58.1]) more MVL than occurs on opposing natural teeth.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrated that prosthodontic ceramic materials produced significantly more antagonist enamel tooth wear than opposing natural enamel tooth wear, and ceramic material type was correlated to the degree of enamel tooth wear. Additional well-conducted, randomized controlled trials with homogeneous specimens are required due to inadequate sample size and number of the clinical studies included in the analyses.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The amount of wear caused by different restorative materials has a high influence on the antagonistic natural teeth and should therefore be evaluated intensively by the dentist.

Wear characteristics of esthetic resin matrix and zirconia reinforced lithium disilicate CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear and surface topography analysis

BACKGROUND

This in vitro study assessed the wear behavior of different CAD-CAM blocks and the abrasion of the enamel antagonist against these materials.

METHODS

64 disk-shaped specimens were prepared from 8 different CAD/CAM blocks as follow: one lithium disilicate glass ceramics block "IPS Emax CAD" as control group, two zirconia reinforced lithium silicate "Vita Suprinity & Celtra DUO," one interpenetrating network ceramic block "Vita Enamic," Three resin-based block composites "Lava Ultimate, Cerasmart & Brilliant-crios" as well as one hybrid nanoceramic "Shofu block HC". All specimens were mounted against canine and tested for two body wear analysis using a chewing simulating loading machine (100,000 cycles, 50 N, 5/55 °C). The amount of wear loss was measured for each specimen using a digital precise scale. Wear area before and after the chewing simulation were evaluated using an optical profilometer. Data analysed using one-way ANOVA test followed by Tukey's post hoc.

RESULTS

The results showed a significantly higher wear loss in resin matrix ceramics in comparison to glass ceramics. However, for tooth wear glass ceramics had significantly higher value than hybrid ceramics.

CONCLUSIONS

Resin based CAD/CAM Blocks gives a superior result when evaluating the wear behavior and its effect on the opposing tooth surface.

Enamel Wear of Antagonist Tooth Caused by Dental Ceramics: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the wear of the antagonist tooth in ceramic restorations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was carried out based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) recommendations; it was also registered in PROSPERO (register number: CRD42022316252). Three databases were consulted in the literature search, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. The citation searching was conducted by two researchers independently. The clinical studies that evaluated wear in antagonist teeth concerning ceramic restoration were included. Twelve articles were selected after eliminating duplicates ones and applying the inclusion criteria, and two were chosen through citation. Fourteen articles were considered for the qualitative and quantitative analysis (meta-regression and meta-analysis).

RESULTS

The mean linear wear of the antagonist tooth in relation to feldspathic was 8.914 μm, for lithium disilicate it was 0.018 μm, and for zirconia it was 0.257 μm. The mean volumetric wear of the antagonist tooth in relation to feldspathic was 0.273 mm3, for hybrid ceramic it was 0.030 mm3, for lithium disilicate it was 0.018 mm3, and for zirconia it was 0.014 mm3. The mean natural tooth wear was 0.7974 μm per month. Tooth wear caused by zirconia at six months was 31.755 μm, at 12 months it was 24.648 μm, and at 24 months it was 20.662 μm.

CONCLUSIONS

Feldspathic produces greater wear of the antagonist tooth from ceramic restorations linearly and volumetrically. In addition, zirconia generates the least wear that will decrease over time, and it will be equal to or less than the natural wear in the tooth.

Evaluation of wear behavior of dental restorative materials against zirconia in vitro

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate two-body wear (2BW) and three-body wear (3BW) of different CAD/CAM and direct restorative materials against zirconia using a dual-axis chewing simulator and an ACTA wear machine.

METHODS

3 CAD-CAM resin-based composite or polymer infiltrated ceramic network blocs, 1 lithium disilicate CAD-CAM ceramic (LS₂), 3 direct resin composites, amalgam and bovine enamel were tested. For 2BW, 8 flat specimens per material were produced, grinded, polished, stored wet (37 °C, 28d) and tested (49 N, 37 °C, 1,200,000 cycles) against zirconia. For 3BW, specimens (n = 10) were stored accordingly, and tested against a zirconia antagonist wheel (3Y-TZP, d = 20 mm, h = 6 mm; 200,000 cycles, F = 15 N, f = 1 Hz, 15% slip) in millet seed suspension. Wear resistance was analysed in a 3D optical non-contact profilometer, measuring vertical wear depth and volume loss for 2BW and mean wear depth and roughness (R_a) for 3BW. Vickers hardness (15 s, HV2) was measured. Statistical analysis was performed using non-parametric tests (Mann-Whitney-U test, p < 0.05).

RESULTS

2BW and 3BW have a different impact on material surfaces. Similar wear resistance was observed for direct and indirect resin based materials with analogous filler configurations in both methods. Bovine enamel exhibited the best wear resistance in 2BW, but the least wear resistance in 3BW against zirconia. Regarding 2BW, a direct/indirect composite material pair of the same manufacturer showed the significantly highest mean volume losses (2.72/2.85 mm³), followed by LS₂ (1.41 mm³). LS₂ presented the best wear resistance in 3BW (mean wear depth 2.85 µm), combined with the highest mean Vickers hardness (598 MPa). No linear correlation was found between Vickers hardness and both wear testing procedures. The zirconia antagonists showed no recordable signs of wear.

SIGNIFICANCE

Dental restorative materials behave differently in 2BW and 3BW laboratory testing. Vickers hardness testing alone cannot hold for a correlation with wear behavior of materials. Micromorphological investigation of material composition can reveal insights in wear mechanisms related to variations in filler technologies.