Abstract
Objective: To assess the efficacy of dedicated finishing/polishing systems on roughness and gloss of VITA Suprinity and IPS e.max CAD.
Method: A total of 24 blocks of Suprinity and 24 of e.max were cut into a wedge shape using an InLab MC-XL milling unit. After crystallization, the 24 Suprinity wedges were divided into four subgroups: group A.1: Suprinity Polishing Set Clinical used for 30 seconds and group A.2: for 60 seconds; group A.3: VITA Akzent Plus Paste; and group A.4: spray. The 24 e.max wedges (group B) were divided into four subgroups accorDing to the finishing procedure: group B.1: Optrafine Ceramic Polishing System for 30 seconds and group B.2: for 60 seconds; group B.3: IPS e.max CAD Crystall/ Glaze paste; and group B.4: spray. After finishing/ polishing, gloss was assessed with a glossmeter and roughness evaluated with a profilometer. Results were analyzed by applying a two-way analysis of variance for gloss and another for roughness (α=0.05). One specimen per each subgroup was observed with a scanning electron microscope.
Results: For roughness, materials and surface were significant factors (p<0.001). Suprinity exhibited significantly lower roughness than e.max. Also the Material-Surface Treatment interaction was statistically significant (p=0.026). For gloss, both material and surface treatment were significant factors (p<0.001). VITA Suprinity showed significantly higher gloss than e.max. Also the Material-Surface Treatment interaction was statistically significant (p<0.001).
Conclusions: Manual finishing/polishing for 60 seconds and glazing paste are the most effective procedures in lowering the roughness of CAD/CAM silica-based glass ceramics. Manual finishing/polishing for 60 seconds allows milled silica-based glass ceramics to yield a higher gloss. VITA Suprinity displayed higher polishability than IPS e.max CAD.
Method: A total of 24 blocks of Suprinity and 24 of e.max were cut into a wedge shape using an InLab MC-XL milling unit. After crystallization, the 24 Suprinity wedges were divided into four subgroups: group A.1: Suprinity Polishing Set Clinical used for 30 seconds and group A.2: for 60 seconds; group A.3: VITA Akzent Plus Paste; and group A.4: spray. The 24 e.max wedges (group B) were divided into four subgroups accorDing to the finishing procedure: group B.1: Optrafine Ceramic Polishing System for 30 seconds and group B.2: for 60 seconds; group B.3: IPS e.max CAD Crystall/ Glaze paste; and group B.4: spray. After finishing/ polishing, gloss was assessed with a glossmeter and roughness evaluated with a profilometer. Results were analyzed by applying a two-way analysis of variance for gloss and another for roughness (α=0.05). One specimen per each subgroup was observed with a scanning electron microscope.
Results: For roughness, materials and surface were significant factors (p<0.001). Suprinity exhibited significantly lower roughness than e.max. Also the Material-Surface Treatment interaction was statistically significant (p=0.026). For gloss, both material and surface treatment were significant factors (p<0.001). VITA Suprinity showed significantly higher gloss than e.max. Also the Material-Surface Treatment interaction was statistically significant (p<0.001).
Conclusions: Manual finishing/polishing for 60 seconds and glazing paste are the most effective procedures in lowering the roughness of CAD/CAM silica-based glass ceramics. Manual finishing/polishing for 60 seconds allows milled silica-based glass ceramics to yield a higher gloss. VITA Suprinity displayed higher polishability than IPS e.max CAD.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 90-100 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Operative Dentistry |
| Volume | 43 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 2018 |