MONOLİTİK ZİRKONYA RESTORASYONLARIN SONUÇ RENK VE TRANSLUSENSİ ÖZELLİKLERİNE FARKLI TİP YAPIŞTIRMA SİMANLARININ ETKİSİ

Year 2021, Volume: 31 Issue: 2, 256 - 262, 15.04.2021

Sedanur Turgut Hamiyet Kılınç Elif Aydoğan Ayaz Bora Bağış

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.890386

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; farklı yapıştırma simanlarının monolitik zirkonyanın optik özelliklerine etkisini in vitro olarak incelemektir.
Gereç ve yöntemler: 50 adet disk şeklinde örnek (1mmx10mm) CAD/CAM sistemiyle monolitik zirkonyadan hazırlandı ve 5 deneysel gruba ayrıldı (n=10). Grup C (kontrol) için: simantasyon işlemi yapılmadı; Grup RS için: rezin siman; Grup RCI için: rezin modifiye cam iyonomer siman; Grup CI için: cam iyonomer siman ve Grup PS için: polikarboksilat siman 0.1 mm kalınlıkta uygulandı. Beyaz ve siyah zemin üzerinde, CIE L*a*b* değerleri kolorimetre cihazı kullanılarak kaydedildi. Translusensi Parametresi (TP) ve simantasyon sonrası oluşabilecek renk değişiklikleri (ΔE*00) hesaplandı. İstatistiksel analiz için tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD testi kullanıldı (p<0,05).
Bulgular: Gruplar arasında L*, a*, b* ve TP değerlerinde anlamlı farklılıklar görüldü (p<0,05). En yüksek L*(87,6±1,6), a*(0,2±0,1) ve b*(15,3±0,2) Grup PS‘de; en düşük L*(83,1±1,3), b*(13,0±0,3) değerleri Grup C’de; en düşük a*(-1,6±0,3) değeri Grup CI’de gözlemlendi. Grup RS ve Grup CI a*(p=0,792) ve b*(p=0,804) değerleri arasında fark bulunmadı. Simantasyon işlemi tüm gruplarda TP’de azalmaya neden oldu (p<0,05). En yüksek TP (14,2) Grup C’de; en düşük TP (12,0) Grup PS’de görüldü. ΔE*00 en düşük Grup RCI-Grup C (1,8 ΔE*00) ve en yüksek Grup PS-Grup C arasında (2,9 ΔE*00) bulundu (p<0,05).
Sonuç: Simantasyon işlemi monolitik zirkonya örneklerde ‘kabul edilir’ eşik düzeyinin üzerinde renk değişimi ve TP değerinde azalmaya neden oldu. TP değerlerindeki azalma her siman tipi için farklı bulundu. Monolitik zirkonya restorasyonlarda seçilecek simanın, restorasyonun optik özelliklerini değiştirebileceği ihtimali göz önünde bulundurulmalıdır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Monolitik zirkonyum, siman, renk stabilitesi, translüsensi.
EFFECT OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF LUTING CEMENTS ON THE FINAL COLOR AND TRANSLUCENCY PROPERTIES OF MONOLITHIC ZIRCONIA RESTORATIONS
ABSTRACT
Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of different luting cements on the optical properties of monolithic zirconia in-vitro.
Material and methods: 50 disc-shaped samples (1mmx10mm) were prepared from monolithic zirconia with CAD/CAM system and divided into 5 experimental groups (n=10). For Group C (control): no cementation was performed; Group RS: resin cement; Group RCI: resin-modified glass ionomer cement, Group CI: glass ionomer cement and Group PS: polycarboxylate cement was applied in 0.1 mm thickness., CIE L*a*b values were recorded with colorimeter on a white and black background. Translucency Parameter (TP) and color changes that may occur after the cementation (ΔE*00) were calculated. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test were used for statistical analysis (p<0.05).
Results: There were significant differences in L*, a*, b* and TP values between the groups (p<0.05). The highest L*(87.6±1.6), a*(0.2±0.1) and b*(15.3±0.2) in Group PS; the lowest L*(83.1±1.3), b*(13.0±0.3) values were in Group C. The lowest a*(-1.6±0.3) was observed in Group CI. There was no difference of a* (p=0.792) and b* (p=0.804) values between Group RS and Group CI. Cementation caused TP decreases in all groups (p<0.05). The highest TP (14.2) was seen in Group C; the lowest TP (12.0) in Group PS. ΔE*00 was found the lowest in Group RCI-Group C (1.8ΔE*00) and the highest in Group PS-Group C (2.9ΔE*00) (p<0.05).
Conclusion: The cementation process caused color change above “acceptable” threshold level in monolithic zirconia samples and a decrease in TP values. The decrease in TP values was found different for each type of cement. The possibility that the chosen cement for monolithic zirconia restorations may change the optical properties of the restoration, should be considered.
Key Words: Monolithic zirconia, Dental cements, Color stability, Translucency.

Keywords

Monolitik zirkonyum, siman, renk stabilites, translüsensi.

References

• 1. Çeli̇k M , Bural C , Bayrakdar G. Diş hekimliğinde zirkonya uygulamaları. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2015; 24(Supplement 8): 106-116.
• 2. Luo XP, Zhang L. Effect of veneering techniques on color and translucency of Y-TZP. J Prosthodont 2010;19:465-70.
• 3. Sulaiman TA, Abdulmajeed AA et al. Optical properties and light irradiance of monolithic zirconia at variable thicknesses. Dent Mater 2015;31:1180-7.
• 4. Kim HK, Kim SH. Optical properties of pre-colored dental monolithic zirconia ceramics. J Dent 2016;55:75-81.
• 5. Bomicke W, Rammelsberg P, Stober T. Short-term prospective clinical evaluation of monolithic and partially veneered zirconia single crowns. J Esthet Restor Dent 2017;29:22-30
• 6. Turgut S. Optical properties of currently used zirconia-based esthetic restorations fabricated with different techniques. J Esthet Restor Dent 2020;32:6-33.
• 7. Tabatabaian F. Color aspect of monolithic zirconia restorations: a review of the literature. J Prosthodont 2019;28:276-87.
• 8. Turgut S, Bagis B, Turkaslan SS, Bagis YH. Effect of ultraviolet aging on translucency of resin-cemented ceramic veneers: An in vitro Study. J Prosthodont 2013;23:39-44
• 9. Kim HK, Kim SH, Lee JB, Han JS, Yeo IS. Effect of the amount of thickness reduction on color and translucency of dental monolithic zirconia ceramics. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:37-42.
• 10. Camposilvan E, Leone R, Gremillard R, Sorrentino R, Zarone F, Chevalier J. Aging resistance, mechanical properties and translucency of different yttria-stabilized zirconiaceramics for monolithic dental crown applications. Dent Mater 2018;34:879-90.
• 11. Şen N. [Evaluation of the effect of monolithic zirconia thickness on the light transmission]. Türkiye Klinikleri J Dent Sci 2018;24:163-8.
• 12. Oh SH, Kim SG. Effect of abutment shade, ceramic thickness, and coping type on the final shade of zirconia all-ceramic restorations: in vitro study of color masking ability. J Adv Prosthodont 2015;7:368-74.
• 13. Turgut S, Kılınç H, Bağış B. Effect of UV aging on translucency of currently used esthetic CAD-CAM materials. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;31:147-52.
• 14. Turgut S, Bagis B. Effect of resin cement and ceramic thickness on final color of laminate veneers: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:179-86.
• 15. Köroğlu A, Ekren O, Kurtoğlu C, Geleneksel ve adeziv dental simanlar hakkinda bir derleme çalışması. [Conventional and adhesive dental luting agents; a literature review] 2012;22:205-216.
• 16. Durkan R, Deste G, Şimşek H. [Productıon types of monolıthıc zırconıa ceramıc systems wıth wear resıstance, optıcal and aestethıc propertıes]. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2018;28:263-70.
• 17. Kılınç H, Turgut S. Optical behaviors of esthetic CAD-CAM restorations after different surface finishing and polishing procedures and UV aging: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2018;120:107-13.
• 18. Sharma G, Wu W, Dalal EN. The CIEDE2000 color difference formula: implementation notes, supplementary test data, and mathematical observations. Color Res Appl 2005;30:21-30.
• 19. Ghinea R, Perez MM, Herrera LJ. Color difference thresholds in dental ceramics. J Dent 2010;38:e57–64.
• 20. Rosenstiel, SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. 4th ed, St. Louis: Mosby 2006. p. 776.
• 21. Niu E, Agustin M, Douglas RD. Color match of machinable lithium disilicate ceramics: Effects of cement color and thickness. J Prosthet Dent 2014;111(1):42-50.
• 22. Vichi A, Ferrari M, Davidson CL. Influence of ceramic and cement thickness on the masking of various types of opaque posts. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83:7-412.
• 23. Terzioglu H, Yilmaz B, Yurdukoru B. The effect of different shades of specific luting agents and IPS empress ceramic thickness on over all color. Int J Periodontics Rest Dent 2009;29:499-505.
• 24. Vagkopoulou T, Koutayas SO, Koidis P, Strub JR. Zirconia in dentistry. Part I. Discovering the nature of an upcoming bioceramic. Eur J Esthet Dent 2009;4:130-51.
• 25. Lee WF, Feng SW, Lu YJ, Wu HJ, Peng PW. Two surface finishes on the color of cemented and colored anatomic-contour zirconia crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116: 264-8.
• 26. Bayindir F, Koseoglu M. The effect of restoration thickness and resin cement shade on the color and translucency of a high-translucent monolithic zirconia. J Prosthet Dent 2019;23:22-34.
• 27. Nakamura K, Harada A, Inagaki R, Kanno T, Niwano Y, Milleding P, et al. Fracture resistance of monolithic zirconia molar crowns with reduced thickness. Acta Odontol Scand 2015;73:602-8.
• 28. Malkond O, Tinastepe N, Kazaoğlu E. Influence of type of cement on the color and translucency of monolithic zirconia. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:902-8.
• 29. Ulu H, Bayindir F. [Monolıthıc zırconıum restoratıons]. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2016;15:67-72.
• 30. Kaya T, Tirali RE. [Advances ın glass ıonomer cements]. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2013;7:71-7.
• 31. Tabatabaian F, Khaledi Z, Namdari M. Effect of ceramic thickness and cement type on the color match of high-translucency monolithic zirconia restorations. Inter J Prosthodont 2020;1:1-8.
• 32. Tabatabaian F, Khodaei M, Namdari M, Mahshid M. Effect of cement type on the color attributes of a zirconia ceramic. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:44-9
• 33. Caba N, Tuncel I, Tak O, Usümez A. The effect of luting cement and titanium base on the final color of zirconium oxide core material. J Prosthodont 2017;26:136-140 34. Paravina RD, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ, Bona AD, Igiel C, Linninger M, et al. Color difference thresholds in dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015;27:1-9.
• 35. Perez MM, Ghinea R, Herrera F, Ionescu CA, Rade D. Color difference thresholds for computer‐simulated human Gingiva. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018;30:24-30.