Wear Behavior Between Enamel Cusp and Three Aesthetic Restorative Materials: Zirconia, Porcelain, and Composite Resin

Overview

Journal J Adv Prosthodont

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2019 Mar 9

PMID 30847044

Citations 9

Authors

Yong-Seok Jang

Thuy-Duong Thi Nguyen

Young-Han Ko

Dae-Woo Lee

Byeong Ju Baik

Min-Ho Lee

Tae-Sung Bae

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify the effects of three aesthetic restorative materials on the wear between tooth and restoration by a pin-on-disk manner.

Materials And Methods: Six aesthetic restorative materials were used to prepare disk specimens for wear test, which were Lava Zirconia as zirconia group, Vintage MP and Cerabien ZR as veneering porcelain group, Gradia Direct microhybrid composite containing prepolymerized fillers, Filtek Z250 microhybrid composite containing zirconia glass and colloidal silica particles, and Filtek Z350 nanocomposite as composite resin group. Vertical loss of the worn cusp, change of the surface roughness of the restoration materials, and the surface topography were investigated after wear test under 9.8-N contact load.

Results: The porcelain groups (Vintage MP and Cerabien ZR) caused the largest vertical loss of teeth when compared with those of the composite resin and zirconia groups, and Filtek Z250 microhybrid composite results in the second-largest vertical loss of teeth. The surface of Filtek Z350 nanocomposite was deeply worn out, but visible wear on the surface of the zirconia and Gradia Direct microhybrid composite was not observed. When the zirconia surface was roughened by sand-blasting, vertical loss of teeth considerably increased when compared with that in the case of fine polished zirconia.

Conclusion: It was identified that microhybrid composite resin containing a prepolymerized filler and zirconia with reduced surface roughness by polishing were the most desirable restorative materials among the tested materials to prevent the two-body wear between aesthetic restorative material and tooth.

Citing Articles

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

Okkar Kyaw , Inokoshi M, Kanazawa M Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2024; 60:258-270.

PMID: 39687636 PMC: 11647087. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2024.11.001.

Fracture strength test of digitally produced ceramic-filled and unfilled dental resin restorations via 3d printing: An study.

Schulz A, Othman A, Strobele D, Wagner J, Mosch R, von See C J Clin Exp Dent. 2023; 15(2):e118-e124.

PMID: 36911153 PMC: 9994653. DOI: 10.4317/jced.60173.

Assessing Enamel Wear of Monolithic Ceramics With Micro-CT and Intra-oral Scanner.

Murbay S, Yeung S, Yip C, Pow E Int Dent J. 2022; 73(4):496-502.

PMID: 36428104 PMC: 10350602. DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2022.10.007.

Wear Behavior between Aesthetic Restorative Materials and Bovine Tooth Enamel.

Hatanaka A, Sawada T, Sen K, Saito T, Sasaki K, Someya T Materials (Basel). 2022; 15(15).

PMID: 35955169 PMC: 9369959. DOI: 10.3390/ma15155234.

Wear Behavior of Different Generations of Zirconia: Present Literature.

Jitwirachot K, Rungsiyakull P, Holloway J, Jia-Mahasap W Int J Dent. 2022; 2022:9341616.

PMID: 35295406 PMC: 8920625. DOI: 10.1155/2022/9341616.

References

Mitra S, Wu D, Holmes B . An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134(10):1382-90. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0054. View

Guazzato M, Albakry M, Ringer S, Swain M . Strength, fracture toughness and microstructure of a selection of all-ceramic materials. Part II. Zirconia-based dental ceramics. Dent Mater. 2004; 20(5):449-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2003.05.002. View

DeLong R . Intra-oral restorative materials wear: rethinking the current approaches: how to measure wear. Dent Mater. 2006; 22(8):702-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.02.003. View

Lambrechts P, Debels E, van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B . How to simulate wear? Overview of existing methods. Dent Mater. 2006; 22(8):693-701. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.02.004. View

Kadokawa A, Suzuki S, Tanaka T . Wear evaluation of porcelain opposing gold, composite resin, and enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 96(4):258-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.08.016. View

Elmaria A, Goldstein G, Vijayaraghavan T, LeGeros R, Hittelman E . An evaluation of wear when enamel is opposed by various ceramic materials and gold. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 96(5):345-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.09.002. View

Heintze S, Cavalleri A, Forjanic M, Zellweger G, Rousson V . Wear of ceramic and antagonist--a systematic evaluation of influencing factors in vitro. Dent Mater. 2007; 24(4):433-49. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.016. View

Christensen G . Remaining challenges with Class II resin-based composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 2007; 138(11):1487-9. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2007.0085. View

Yesil Z, Alapati S, Johnston W, Seghi R . Evaluation of the wear resistance of new nanocomposite resin restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99(6):435-43. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60105-5. View

10.

Jandt K, Sigusch B . Future perspectives of resin-based dental materials. Dent Mater. 2009; 25(8):1001-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.02.009. View

11.

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; 101(5):342-9. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60068-8. View

12.

Blackham J, Vandewalle K, Lien W . Properties of hybrid resin composite systems containing prepolymerized filler particles. Oper Dent. 2009; 34(6):697-702. DOI: 10.2341/08-118-L. View

13.

Seghi R, Rosenstiel S, Bauer P . Abrasion of human enamel by different dental ceramics in vitro. J Dent Res. 1991; 70(3):221-5. DOI: 10.1177/00220345910700031301. View

14.

Albashaireh Z, Ghazal M, Kern M . Two-body wear of different ceramic materials opposed to zirconia ceramic. J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 104(2):105-13. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60102-3. View

15.

Hahnel S, Schultz S, Trempler C, Ach B, Handel G, Rosentritt M . Two-body wear of dental restorative materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2011; 4(3):237-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2010.06.001. View

16.

Harrison A . Wear of combinations of acrylic resin and porcelain, on an abrasion testing machine. J Oral Rehabil. 1978; 5(2):111-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1978.tb01202.x. View

17.

Preis V, Behr M, Kolbeck C, Hahnel S, Handel G, Rosentritt M . Wear performance of substructure ceramics and veneering porcelains. Dent Mater. 2011; 27(8):796-804. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.04.001. View

18.

Palaniappan S, Bharadwaj D, Mattar D, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P . Nanofilled and microhybrid composite restorations: Five-year clinical wear performances. Dent Mater. 2011; 27(7):692-700. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.03.012. View

19.

Lee A, He L, Lyons K, Swain M . Tooth wear and wear investigations in dentistry. J Oral Rehabil. 2011; 39(3):217-25. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2011.02257.x. View

20.

Kim M, Oh S, Kim J, Ju S, Seo D, Jun S . Wear evaluation of the human enamel opposing different Y-TZP dental ceramics and other porcelains. J Dent. 2012; 40(11):979-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.08.004. View