An in-vitro wear study of human enamel opposing heat-pressed ceramics.
10.4047/jkap.2009.47.1.21
- Author:
Chan Yong PARK
1
;
Young Chan JEON
;
Chang Mo JEONG
;
Mi Jung YUN
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Korea. jeonyc@paran.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
All-ceramic restoration;
Heat-pressed ceramics;
Enamel wear;
e-max Press;
Empress Esthetic;
Tribometer
- MeSH:
Alloys;
Bicuspid;
Ceramics;
Dental Enamel;
Dental Porcelain;
Humans;
Microscopy, Electron, Scanning;
Track and Field;
Water
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2009;47(1):21-28
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the wear characteristics of human enamel opposing 2 heat-pressed ceramics (e.max Press and Empress Esthetic), conventional feldspathic porcelain (Ceramco 3) and type III gold alloy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Intact cusps of extracted premolars were used for enamel specimens. Five disk samples were made for each of two heat-pressed ceramics groups, conventional feldspathic porcelain group and type III gold alloy group. Wear tests were conducted in distilled water using a pin-on-disk tribometer. The amount of enamel wear was determined by weighing the enamel specimens before and after wear tests, and the weight was converted to volumes by average density. The wear tracks were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and surface profilometer to elucidate the wear characteristics. RESULTS: 1. Ceramco 3 led to the greatest amount of enamel wear followed by Empress Esthetic, e.max Press and type III gold alloy. However, there was no significant difference between Ceramco 3 and Empress Esthetic (P > .05), and there were also no significant differences among Empress Esthetic, e.max Press and type III gold alloy (P > .05). 2. The average surface roughness of e.max Press after wear test was smallest followed by Empress Esthetic and Ceramco 3, but there was no significant difference between Empress Esthetic and Ceramco 3 (P > .05). 3. There were no significant differences among the depth of wear tracks of all the groups (P > .05). The group that showed the largest width of wear track was Ceramco 3 followed by Empress Esthetic, e.max Press and type III gold alloy. However, there was no significant difference between e.max Press and Empress Esthetic (P > .05), and there was also no significant difference between Empress Esthetic and Ceramco 3 (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this study, heat-pressed ceramics were not more abrasive than conventional feldspathic porcelain.
