How will surface treatments affect the translucency of porcelain laminate veneers?

Abstract

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether surface treatments affect the translucency of laminate veneers with different shades and thicknesses. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 224 disc-shaped ceramic veneers were prepared from A1, A3, HT (High Translucent) and HO (High Opaque) shades of IPS e.max Press (Ivoclar Vivadent) with 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm thicknesses. The ceramics were divided into four groups for surface treatments. Group C: no surface treatments; Group HF: etched with hydrofluoric acid; Group SB: sandblasted with 50-μm Al 2 O 3 ; and Group L; irradiated with an Er;YAG laser. A translucent shade of resin cement (Rely X Veneer, 3M ESPE) was chosen for cementation. The color values of the veneers were measured with a colorimeter and translucency parameter (TP) values were calculated. A three-way ANOVA with interactions for TP values was performed and Bonferroni tests were used when appropriate (α=0.05). RESULTS. There were significant interactions between the surface treatments, ceramic shades and thicknesses (P=.001). For the 0.5-mm-thick specimens there were significant differences after the SB and L treatments. There was no significant difference between the HF and C treatments for any shades or thicknesses (P>.05). For the 1-mm-thick ceramics, there was only a significant difference between the L and C treatments for the HT shade ceramics (P=.01). There were also significant differences between the SB and C treatments except not for the HO shades (P=.768). CONCLUSION. The SB and L treatments caused laminate veneers to become more opaque; however, HF treatment did not affect the TP values. When the laminate veneers were thinner, both the shade of the ceramic and the SB and laser treatments had a greater effect on the TP values. [ J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:8-13]

The Effect of Surface Treatments on the Mechanical and Optical Behaviors of CAD/CAM Restorative Materials

“…In this study, all surface treatments significantly affected the translucency of resin‐based materials, whereas only airborne‐particle abrasion decreased the TP value of lithium disilicate ceramic. Consistent with the current study, Turgut et al also reported that lithium disilicate ceramic became more opaque after airborne‐particle abrasion, whereas HFA etching did not affect the translucency. In addition to the surface irregularities, kinetic energy transferred to the surface of the material during airborne‐particle abrasion with alumina particles, and heat increase during laser irradiation has been noted to cause melting of the materials’ surfaces .…”

“…Regardless of the microstructure of the restorative material, adhesive luting protocol requires conditioning of the intaglio surface of the restoration to enhance the bond strength of restorative material to resin cement. It has been reported that surface treatment affects not only bond strength but also mechanical and optical properties of ceramics . Therefore, this in vitro study investigated the effect of different surface treatment methods on the flexural strength, color, and translucency of current CAD/CAM restorative materials.…”

“…Surface treatments also affect the optical properties due to increased surface roughness and modification of surface texture. It has been demonstrated that airborne‐particle abrasion and laser application cause a color change and decrease translucency of lithium disilicate ceramic …”

In Vitro Evaluation and Comparison of the Translucency of Two Different All-Ceramic Systems

“…We did not use cores with different thicknesses because it was previously reported that the material thickness changes the translucency (4,(28)(29)(30).…”

Effect of porcelain thickness and translucency on the final shade of IPS e.max CAD overlaying a dark substrate.

“…Previous studies have been conducted on how translucency can affect the optical properties of all-ceramic systems (Akar et al, 2014;Al Ben Ali, Kang, Finkelman, Zandparsa, & Hirayama, 2014;Awad et al, 2015;Barizon et al, 2014;Harada et al, 2016;Heffernan et al, 2002;Johnston, 2014;Sen & Us, 2017;Skyllouriotis, Yamamoto, & Nathanson, 2017;Turgut et al, 2014;Vichi, Carrabba, Paravina, & Ferrari, 2014;Vichi et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2013).…”