Journal of Technologic Dentistry (대한치과기공학회지)

Korean Academy of Dental Technology (대한치과기공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison on marginal fitness and mechanical properties of copings with zirconia block and CAM type

지르코니아 블록과 CAM 종류에 따른 코핑의 변연적합도와 기계적 특성 비교

  • Chung, In-Sung (Department of Dental Laboratory Science, College of Health Science, Catholic University of Pusan) ;
  • Jeon, Byung-Wook (Department of Dental Laboratory Science, College of Health Science, Catholic University of Pusan) ;
  • Kim, Won-Young (Department of Dental Laboratory Science, College of Health Science, Catholic University of Pusan) ;
  • Kang, Jae-Min (Department of Dental Laboratory Science, College of Health Science, Catholic University of Pusan)
  • 정인성 (부산가톨릭대학교 보건과학대학 치기공학과) ;
  • 전병욱 (부산가톨릭대학교 보건과학대학 치기공학과) ;
  • 김원영 (부산가톨릭대학교 보건과학대학 치기공학과) ;
  • 강재민 (부산가톨릭대학교 보건과학대학 치기공학과)
  • Received : 2017.04.29
  • Accepted : 2017.06.19
  • Published : 2017.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study provided the basic data for selection the zirconia block and CAM by means of marginal fitness observations, flexural strength test and hardness test. Methods: Three dental zirconia blocks(ABCera, NaturaZ, ST98) and two dental milling machines(CAD/CAM MS, DWX-50) were used in this study. Metal abutment(diameter 10 mm, height 5 mm, inclined angle $3^{\circ}$ taper, 1 mm chamfer margin) was fabricated by Ti customized abutment, and then zirconia copings were fabricated for each ten specimens. Silicone replica technique was used to observe the marginal fitness of cross-sections with a stereomicroscope at ${\times}50$ magnification. The dental zirconia blocks was cut into 10 pieces each having a size of $25mm{\times}5mm{\times}1mm$, and fabricated according to the manufacturer's instructions, and flexural strength was measured using a universal testing machine. For hardness test, a micro Vickers hardness tester was used as it was in the flexural strength test. Statistical analysis was performed by one way ANOVA and post-test was performed by Scheffe test. Results: For marginal fitness of bucco-lingual axial, ZU group($59.7{\pm}10.3{\mu}m$) was the lowest, followed by RA, ZA, ZD, RD, RU. For marginal fitness of mesio-distal axial, ZU group($59.3{\pm}10.2{\mu}m$) was the lowest, followed by RA, ZA, RD, ZD, RU. One-way ANOVA showed statistically significant difference between groups(p<0.05). For flexural strength, ABCera block($718.0{\pm}57.2MPa$) was the highest, followed by NaturaZ, ST98. For hardness, ABCera block($1550.3{\pm}19.8Hv$) was the highest, followed by ST98, NaturaZ. There was no significant difference in flexural strength and hardness between blocks(p>0.05). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, the type of dental zirconia block did influence the marginal fitness, and all dental zirconia blocks are expected to be suitable for clinical application. The highest flexural strength and hardness were ABCera block, and no statistically significant difference was observed.

Keywords

References

  1. Abbate MF, Tjan AHL, Fox WM. Comparison of the marginal fit of various ceramic crown. J Prosthet Dent, 61, 527-531, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90270-9
  2. Agustin-Panadero R, Roman-Rodriguez JL, Ferreiroa A, Sola-Ruiz MF, Fons-Font A. Zirconia in fixed prosthesis. A literature review. J Clin Exp Dent, 6, e66-73, 2014.
  3. Anusavice KJ, Hojjatie B. Tensile stress in glassceramic crowns: effect of flaws and cement voids. Int J Prosthodont 5, 351-358, 1991.
  4. Ban S, Anusavice KJ. Influence of test method on failure stress of brittle dental materials. J Dent Res, 69, 1791-1799, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345900690120201
  5. Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kastner K, Walter MH. Clinical fit of Procera All Ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent, 84, 419-424, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.109125
  6. Brunton PA, Smith P, McCord F, Wilson NHF. Procera all-ceramic crowns: a new approach to an old problem? Br Dent J, 186, 430-434, 1999.
  7. Choi JW, Choi BC, Kim SC. Marginal fit of the prosthesis fabricated by dental oral scanner and model scanner. Kor J Dent Mater, 44, 79-86, 2017. https://doi.org/10.14815/kjdm.2017.44.1.079
  8. Christina A, Maria R, William HD. Nondestructive, in vitro quantification of crown margins. J Prosthet Dent, 85, 575-584, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.114268
  9. Chung IS, Jeon BW, Kim WY. Comparison of marginal fitness of zirconia copings according to impression techniques and zirconia blocks. Journal of Contents Association, 16, 2016.
  10. Dauti R, Cvikl B, Franz A, Schwarze UY, Lilaj B, Rybaczek T, Moritz A. Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with $lava^{TM}$ COS and conventional impression technique. BMC Oral Health, 16, 129-136, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-016-0323-8
  11. Denry I, Kelly JR. State of the art of zirconia for dental applications. Dent Mater, 24, 299-307, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.05.007
  12. Dentistry-Ceramic materials. ISO 6872:2008.
  13. Euan R, Figueras-Alvarez O, Cabratosa-Termes J, Oliver-Parra R. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: Influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. J Prosthet Dent, 112, 155-162, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.10.012
  14. Kelly JR, Giordano R, Pober R, Cima MJ. Fracture surface analysis of dental ceramics: Clinically failed restorations. Int J Prosthodont, 3, 430-440, 1990.
  15. Kim DY, Jung ID, Lee JJ, Kim JH, Kim MB, Kim WC. Evaluation of marginal and internal gap of wax coping fabricated by CAD/CAM system using intraoral scanner. J Kor Aca Dent Tec, 37, 1-7, 2015. https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2015.37.1.1
  16. Koh JW, Yang JH, Lee SH. Influence of thickness of Empress 2 ceramic on fracture strength. J Korean Acad Prosthodont, 38, 446-460, 2000.
  17. Ko IS, Kim JM, Cho HW. Comparison of micro CT and cross-section technique for evaluation of marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate crowns. J Korean Acad Prosthodont, 54, 226-233, 2016. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2016.54.3.226
  18. Kosmac T, Oblak C, Jevnikar P, Funduk N, Marion L. The effect of surface grinding and sandblasting on flexural strength and reliability of Y-TZP zirconia ceramic. Dent Mater, 15, 426-433, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(99)00070-6
  19. Lee HH, Lee CJ, Asaoka K. Correlation in the mechanical properties of acrylic denture base resins. Dent Mater J, 31, 157-164, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2011-205
  20. Lee JH, Lee YB, Kim YW, Oh KD, Park HC. Fabrication and characteristics of Y-TZP/Ce-TZP structural ceramics. Kor Ceram Soc, 33, 1177-1185, 1996.
  21. Momann WH, Schug J. Grinding precision and accuracy of fit of CEREC 2 CAD-CIM inlays. J Am Dent Assoc, 128, 47-53, 1997. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1997.0025
  22. Pulgarin HLC, Albano MP. Sintering, microstructure and hardness of different alumina-zirconia composites. Ceram Int, 40, 5289-5298, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2013.10.102
  23. Rinke S, Hüs A, Jahn L. Marginal accuracy and fracture strength of conventional and copy-milled all-ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont, 8, 303-310, 1995.
  24. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Luthy H, Hammerle CHF. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont, 20, 151-156, 2007.
  25. Swab JJ. Low temperature degradation of Y-TZP materials. J Mater Sci, 26, 6706-6714, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02402664
  26. Yamaguchi H, Hamano N, Katsumata Y, Ino S. The manufacturing characterization of zirconia core copings of CAD/CAM systems. Asian Pac J Dent, 12, 11-16, 2012.