Effect of erosive and abrasive challenges on the glaze layer applied to ceramic materials
| Autor: | Beatriz Togoro Ferreira da Silva, Amanda Endres Willers, Adriana Bona Matos, Paulo Francisco Cesar, Luciana Kfouri Siriani |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Toothbrushing
Ceramics Materials science Surface Properties Scanning electron microscope Abrasion (mechanical) 0206 medical engineering Abrasive Glaze 030206 dentistry 02 engineering and technology Dental Porcelain 020601 biomedical engineering 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Materials Testing Microscopy Electron Scanning Erosion Surface roughness Composite material General Dentistry Deposition (chemistry) Layer (electronics) |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 32:815-822 |
| ISSN: | 1708-8240 1496-4155 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/jerd.12643 |
| Popis: | Purpose This study aims to evaluate the effect of erosive, abrasive, and erosive/abrasive challenges on the glaze layer of ceramic materials. Methods Ninety-five samples of monolithic zirconia (MZ) (LuxaCam Zircon HT-Plus) and lithium disilicate (LD) (IPS e.max CAD) were divided according to the response variables: Surface roughness and surface loss (n = 10), evaluated with optical profilometry; surface topography, with scanning electron microscopy SEM (n = 3); and biofilm deposition, with microbiological assay (n = 5). The evaluations were performed in three different time evaluations: (a) Sintered, (b) Glaze, and (c) Challenge (Erosion, Abrasion, and Erosion/Abrasion). Erosion consisted in immersing specimens in HCl solution, abrasion was performed with brushing machine, and erosion/abrasion consisted of a combination of the two previous protocols. Data were analyzed with parametric tests (P Results MZ glaze layer presented significantly higher surface roughness (P = 0.00), surface loss (P = 0.03), and biofilm deposition (P = 0.00) than LD. Abrasion and erosion/abrasion showed similar outcomes, generating significantly higher surface roughness (P = 0.00), surface loss (P = 0.00), and biofilm deposition (P = 0.01) than erosion. Conclusions Glaze layer properties were altered by the challenges, with abrasion and erosion/abrasion generating higher surface roughness, surface loss, and biofilm deposition than erosion. A significant correlation was found between the surface roughness and biofilm deposition. Clinical significance The glaze layer is susceptible to challenges, especially to abrasion and erosion/abrasion, which generated greater surface roughness and surface loss than erosion. The greater surface roughness lead to a greater biofilm deposition on the glaze layer. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text