Comparison of Translucency and Flexural Strength of Zirconia Reinforced Lithium Silicate, Zirconia and Lithium Disilicate

Abstract

Objectives: Optimal mechanical and aesthetic properties are expected from all ceramic restorations in dentistry to maintain good prognosis. Zirconia restorations have had mechanical advantages and lithium disilicate ceramics have provided aesthetic advantages. This study intended to compare the four-point flexural strength and translucency of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate with solid zirconia and lithium disilicate. Material and Methods: 90 bars (1x4x18 mm) for flexural strength test (n=30) and 30 square shaped (1x10x10 mm) samples for translucency measurement (n=10) were obtained from solid zirconia (BR-BruxZir), zirconia reinforced lithium silicate (VS-Vita Suprinity) and lithium disilicate (EM-Emax CAD) blocks. All BR samples were sintered, VS and EM were crystallized according to the manufacturer's recommendations. These samples were grinded and polished. Subsequently, they were ultrasonically cleaned and flexural strength values (MPa) were obtained in a universal test device. Color measurements were performed with a dental spectrophotometer using black and white backgrounds to determine the translucency values. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests. Results: BR showed the highest mean flexural strength. There was no significant difference between EM and VS (p>0.05), while BR showed significantly different flexural strength (p<0.05). EM and VS showed similar translucency, whereas translucency of BR was significantly lower than other groups (p<0.05). Conclusions: Lithium silicate reinforced with zirconia showed similar translucency with lithium disilicate. However, being reinforced with zirconia did not contribute to four point flexural strength.

Keywords

• four-point flexural strength
• lithium disilicate
• translucency
• zirconia
• zirconia reinforced lithium silicate

Zirkonya ile Güçlendirilmiş Lityum Silikat, Zirkonya ve Lityum Disilikatın Translüsensi ve Bükülme Dayanımının Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Amaç: Diş hekimliğinde tam seramik restorasyonların prognozu için optimum mekanik ve estetik özellikler beklenmektedir. Zirkonya restorasyonlar mekanik anlamda avantaj sağlarken lityum disilikat restorasyonlar estetik yönünden üstünlük göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada zirkonya, lityum disilikat ve zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikatın translüsensi ve dört nokta bükülme dayanımının karşılaştırılması amaçlandı. Gereç ve Yöntem: Solid zirkonya (BR-BruxZir), zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat (VS-Vita Suprinity) ve lityum disilikat (EM-Emax CAD) bloklardan bükülme dayanımı için 90 adet bar (1x4x18 mm) şekilli örnek (n=30) ve translüsensi ölçümü için 30 adet kare (1x10x10 mm) şekilli örnek (n=10) elde edildi. Tüm BR örnekler sinterlendi, VS ve EM örnekler üreticinin önerileri doğrultusunda kristalize edildi. Zımparalama ve polisaj işlemlerinden sonra örnekler ultrasonik olarak temizlendi. Bükülme dayanımı testi universal test cihazında gerçekleştirildi ve sonuçlar kaydedildi (MPa). Renk değerlendirmesi, beyaz ve siyah arka planlar kullanılarak dental spektrofotometre ile yapıldı. İstatistiksel analiz için one-way ANOVA ve Tukey HSD testleri kullanıldı. Bulgular: En yüksek ortalama bükülme dayanımı BR grubunda gözlendi. EM veVS (p>0.05) arasında anlamlı bir farklılık bulunmazken, BR'nin bükülme dayanımı anlamlı farklılık gösterdi (p<0.05). EM ve VS benzer translüsensi özelliği sergilerken BR grubunun translüsensi değerleri diğer gruplardan anlamlı oranda düşük bulundu (p<0.05). Sonuç: Zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat lityum disilikat ile benzer translüsensi özelliği gösterdi. Fakat zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş olmanın lityum silikatın dört nokta bükülme dayanımına katkı sağlamadığı görüldü.

Keywords

• dört nokta bükülme dayanımı
• lityum disilikat
• translüsensi
• zirkonya
• zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat

References

1. 1. Denry I, Holloway JA. Ceramics for dental applications: A review. Materials (Basel). 2010;3(1):351-368. doi:10.3390/ma3010351
2. 2. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: Current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J. 2009;28(1):44-56. doi:10.4012/dmj.28.44
3. 3. Albakry M, Guazzato M, Swain MV. Biaxial flexural strength and microstructure changes of two recycled pressable glass ceramics. J Prosthodont. 2004;13(3):141-149. doi:10.1111/j.1532-849X.2004.04025.x
4. 4. Lee WF, Feng SW, Lu YJ, Wu HJ, Peng PW. Effects of two surface finishes on the color of cemented and colored anatomic-contour zirconia crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(2):264-268. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.012
5. 5.Baldissara P, Wandscher VF, Marchionatti AME, Parisi C, Monaco C, Ciocca L. Translucency of IPS e.max and cubic zirconia monolithic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(2):269-275. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.09.007
6. 6. Do U, Anleitung GD. Bruxzir® milling blanks english. 1200:1-2.
7. 7. Culp L, McLaren EA. Lithium disilicate: the restorative material of multiple options. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2010;31(9):1-8.
8. 8.Suprinity V. No Title. Published 2022. https://www.vita-zahnfabrik.com/en/VITA-SUPRINITY-PC-44049.html 9. Norton CBCG. Ceramic Materials: Science and Engineering. Springer Science & Business Media; 2007.

9. 10.Kim-Pusateri S, Brewer JD, Davis EL, Wee AG. Reliability and accuracy of four dental shade-matching devices. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101(3):193-199. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60028-7
10. 11.Johnston WM, Reisbick MH. Color and translucency changes during and after curing of esthetic restorative materials. Dent Mater. 1997;13(2):89-97. doi:10.1016/S0109-5641(97)80017-6
11. 12. Johnston WM. Review of translucency determinations and applications to dental materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014;26(4):217-223. doi:10.1111/jerd.12112
12. 13. Johnston WM, Ma T, Kienle BH. Translucency parameter of colorants for maxillofacial prostheses. Int J Prosthodont. 1995;8(1):79-86. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7710631
13. 14. Quinn GD, Hoffman K, Quinn JB. Strength and fracture origins of a feldspathic porcelain. Dent Mater. 2012;28(5):502-511. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.12.005
14. 15. Mackert J, Williams AL. Microcracks in dental porcelain and their behavior during multiple firing. J Dent Res. 1996;75(7):1484-1490. doi:10.1177/00220345960750070801
15. 16. Anusavice KJ, Kakar K, Ferree N. Which mechanical and physical testing methods are relevant for predicting the clinical performance of ceramic-based dental prostheses? Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18(SUPPL. 3):218-231. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01460.x
16. 17. Ottoni R, Griggs JA, Corazza PH, Della Bona Á, Borba M. Precision of different fatigue methods for predicting glass-ceramic failure. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;88(August):497-503. doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.09.004
17. 18. Furtado de Mendonca A, Shahmoradi M, de Gouvêa CVD, De Souza GM, Ellakwa A. Microstructural and Mechanical Characterization of CAD/CAM Materials for Monolithic Dental Restorations. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(2):e587-e594. doi:10.1111/jopr.12964
18. 19. Desk O. Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Advanced Ceramics at Ambient. Order A J Theory Ordered Sets Its Appl. 2003;03:1-19. doi:10.1520/C1161-13.2
19. 20.Kashkari A, Yilmaz B, Brantley WA, Schricker SR, Johnston WM. Fracture analysis of monolithic CAD-CAM crowns. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019;31(4):346-352. doi:10.1111/jerd.12462
20. 21.Chu SJ, Trushkowsky RD, Paravina RD. Dental color matching instruments and systems. Review of clinical and research aspects. J Dent. 2010;38(SUPPL. 2):2-16. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.001
21. 22.Sulaiman TA, Abdulmajeed AA, Donovan TE, et al. Optical properties and light irradiance of monolithic zirconia at variable thicknesses. Dent Mater. 2015;31(10):1180-1187. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2015.06.016
22. 23. Chu SJ, Devigus A, Paravina R, Mielesezko A. Fundamentals of Color: Shade Matching and Communication in Esthetic Dentistry. Quintessence, 2004:7-19.
23. 24. Brodbelt RHW, O’brien WJ, Fan PL. Translucency of Dental Porcelains. J Dent Res. 1980;59(1):70-75. doi:10.1177/00220345800590011101
24. 25. Vichi A, Carrabba M, Paravina R, Ferrari M. Translucency of ceramic materials for CEREC CAD/CAM system. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014;26(4):224-231. doi:10.1111/jerd.12105
25. 26. Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM. Craig's Restorative Dental Materials. Philadelphia:Elsevier, 2012:253–75. 27. Sen N, Us YO. Mechanical and optical properties of monolithic CAD-CAM restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(4):593-599. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.06.012
26. 28. Linhares LA, Pottmaier LF, Gré CP, De Ré Silveira RC, Shibata S, Vieira LCC. Effect of zirconia addition to lithium disilicate ceramic on translucency and bond strength using different adhesive strategies. Dent Mater. 2015;31(October):e28. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2015.08.064
27. 29. Gunal B, Ulusoy MM. Optical properties of contemporary monolithic CAD-CAM restorative materials at different thicknesses. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018;30(5):434-441. doi:10.1111/jerd.12382