Antagonist wear of monolithic zirconia crowns after 2 years

Lohbauer, Ulrich; Reich, Sven

doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1872-6

Cited by 93 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As expected for a composite material, the properties are intermediate between those of ceramics and particle-filled resins. 60,61,63 The elastic modulus of these materials is in the range of 30 GPa, which is half of that reported for conventional veneering ceramics but closer to what is usually reported for dentin (15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). 58,63 Typical ceramic materials have a higher elastic modulus values than PICN 64 .…”

Section: Polymer Infiltrated Ceramic Network (Picns)mentioning

confidence: 61%

“…The results showed that monolithic zirconia promoted an acceptable surface wear rate of the antagonist surface (natural enamel or ceramic material) after two years. 17 Therefore, monolithic Y-TZP restorations with good surface finishing are not likely to wear significantly the antagonist element. However, following up these Y-TZP restorations is important because if there is a decrease in the surface quality, their wear potential will increase significantly.…”

Section: Monolithic Zirconia Restorationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dental ceramics: a review of new materials and processing methods

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of computerized systems for the production of dental restorations associated to the development of novel microstructures for ceramic materials has caused an important change in the clinical workflow for dentists and technicians, as well as in the treatment options offered to patients. New microstructures have also been developed by the industry in order to offer ceramic and composite materials with optimized properties, i.e., good mechanical properties, appropriate wear behavior and acceptable aesthetic characteristics. The objective of this literature review is to discuss the main advantages and disadvantages of the new ceramic systems and processing methods. The manuscript is divided in five parts: I) monolithic zirconia restorations; II) multilayered dental prostheses; III) new glass-ceramics; IV) polymer infiltrated ceramics; and V) novel processing technologies. Dental ceramics and processing technologies have evolved significantly in the past ten years, with most of the evolution being related to new microstructures and CAD-CAM methods. In addition, a trend towards the use of monolithic restorations has changed the way clinicians produce all-ceramic dental prostheses, since the more aesthetic multilayered restorations unfortunately are more prone to chipping or delamination. Composite materials processed via CAD-CAM have become an interesting option, as they have intermediate properties between ceramics and polymers and are more easily milled and polished.

show abstract

Section: Polymer Infiltrated Ceramic Network (Picns)mentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Monolithic Zirconia Restorationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental ceramics: a review of new materials and processing methods

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, there are five clinical studies which examined the wear potential of monolithic zirconia against different antagonists, including this current study (Table 1) [25–27]. This table compares all clinical studies in terms of the different variables employed in each.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in vitro studies are hard to compare with each other because of differences in surface finish of material, type of material, method of wear and type of wear analysis used. The limited clinical studies which have been published describe how monolithic zirconia is a viable restorative material in that the wear of antagonist enamel is within the range of acceptable limits [25–28]. However, since there is a limited number of clinical studies available, there is need for more clinical analyses to further validate the wear compatibility of zirconia with enamel.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized clinical study of wear of enamel antagonists against polished monolithic zirconia crowns

Esquivel‐Upshaw

Kim

Hsu

et al. 2018

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the in vivo maximum wear of enamel opposing monolithic zirconia crowns, enamel opposing porcelain fused to metal crowns and enamel opposing enamel. Methods Thirty patients needing single crowns were randomized to receive either a monolithic zirconia or metal-ceramic crown. Two non-restored opposing teeth in the same quadrants were identified to serve as enamel controls. After cementation, quadrants were scanned for baseline data. Polyvinylsiloxane impressions were obtained and poured in white stone. Patients were recalled at six-months and one-year for re-impression. Stone models were scanned using a tabletop laserscanner to determine maximum wear. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U to determine any significant differences between the wear of enamel against zirconia and metal-ceramic crowns. Results Sixteen zirconia and 14 metal-ceramic crowns were delivered. There were no statistical differences in mean wear of crown types (p = 0.165); enamel antagonists (p = 0.235) and enamel controls (p = 0.843) after one year. Conclusion Monolithic zirconia exhibited comparable wear of enamel compared with metal-ceramic crowns and control enamel after one year. Significance This study is clinically significant because the use of polished monolithic zirconia demonstrated comparable wear of opposing enamel to metal-ceramic and enamel antagonists.

show abstract

“…However, a major problem of this kind of venneered restorations, even supported with strong oxide ceramics, is their low fracture resistance and high chipping risk [3][4][5]. These problems were proposed to be solved by the recent introduction of the full-contour monolithic zirconia restorations that are veneering and glazing layer-free [6][7][8][9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grinding and polishing efficiency of a novel self-glazed zirconia versus the conventional dry-pressed and sintered zirconia ceramics

Alrayes

Zhao

Feng

et al. 2018

Advances in Applied Ceramics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The grinding and polishing efficiency of self-glazed zirconia and Zenostar zirconia, prepared by wet and dry approaches, respectively, were evaluated. Each sample was divided into two subgroups (n = 5). One was ground, and the other was polished by following the clinical adjustment protocol. Statistics were analysed by independent t-test to a significance level of p < .05. More material was ground off in self-glazed zirconia than in Zenostar zirconia (p < .05) during the same period, especially during the coarse grinding procedure (p < .05), whereas the grinding efficiency in fine grinding stage was not significantly different (p > .05). The polishing efficiency of the whole and of the fine polishing procedure of the two kinds of zirconia was significantly different (p < .05). It thus can be concluded that grinding and polishing efficiency of a novel self-glazed zirconia is significantly higher than that of the conventional Zenostar zirconia. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Antagonist wear of monolithic zirconia crowns after 2 years

Abstract: The monolithic zirconia crowns (LAVA Plus) show acceptable antagonist wear rates after 2 years in situ, regardless of natural enamel or ceramics as antagonist materials.

Cited by 93 publications

References 20 publications

Dental ceramics: a review of new materials and processing methods

Dental ceramics: a review of new materials and processing methods

Randomized clinical study of wear of enamel antagonists against polished monolithic zirconia crowns

Grinding and polishing efficiency of a novel self-glazed zirconia versus the conventional dry-pressed and sintered zirconia ceramics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About