Cargando…

Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials

PURPOSE: The opacity of zirconia is an esthetic disadvantage that hinders achieving natural and shade-matched restorations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the translucency of non-colored and colored framework zirconia and monolithic zirconia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The three groups tested wer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tuncel, İlkin, Turp, Işıl, Üşümez, Aslıhan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4919487/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350851
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.3.181
_version_ 1782439255172186112
author Tuncel, İlkin
Turp, Işıl
Üşümez, Aslıhan
author_facet Tuncel, İlkin
Turp, Işıl
Üşümez, Aslıhan
author_sort Tuncel, İlkin
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The opacity of zirconia is an esthetic disadvantage that hinders achieving natural and shade-matched restorations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the translucency of non-colored and colored framework zirconia and monolithic zirconia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The three groups tested were: non-colored framework zirconia, colored framework zirconia with the A3 shade according to Vita Classic Scale, and monolithic zirconia (n=5). The specimens were fabricated in the dimensions of 15×12×0.5 mm. A spectrophotometer was used to measure the contrast ratio, which is indicative of translucency. Three measurements were made to obtain the contrast ratios of the materials over a white background (L(*)w) and a black background (L(*)b). The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance and Tukey HSD tests. One specimen from each group was chosen for scanning electron microscope analysis. The determined areas of the SEM images were divided by the number of grains in order to calculate the mean grain size. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed among all groups (P<.05). Non-colored zirconia had the highest translucency with a contrast ratio of 0.75, while monolithic zirconia had the lowest translucency with a contrast ratio of 0.8. The mean grain sizes of the non-colored, colored, and monolithic zirconia were 233, 256, and 361 nm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The translucency of the zirconia was affected by the coloring procedure and the grain size. Although monolithic zirconia may not be the best esthetic material for the anterior region, it may serve as an alternative in the posterior region for the bilayered zirconia restorations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4919487
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49194872016-06-27 Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials Tuncel, İlkin Turp, Işıl Üşümez, Aslıhan J Adv Prosthodont Original Article PURPOSE: The opacity of zirconia is an esthetic disadvantage that hinders achieving natural and shade-matched restorations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the translucency of non-colored and colored framework zirconia and monolithic zirconia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The three groups tested were: non-colored framework zirconia, colored framework zirconia with the A3 shade according to Vita Classic Scale, and monolithic zirconia (n=5). The specimens were fabricated in the dimensions of 15×12×0.5 mm. A spectrophotometer was used to measure the contrast ratio, which is indicative of translucency. Three measurements were made to obtain the contrast ratios of the materials over a white background (L(*)w) and a black background (L(*)b). The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance and Tukey HSD tests. One specimen from each group was chosen for scanning electron microscope analysis. The determined areas of the SEM images were divided by the number of grains in order to calculate the mean grain size. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed among all groups (P<.05). Non-colored zirconia had the highest translucency with a contrast ratio of 0.75, while monolithic zirconia had the lowest translucency with a contrast ratio of 0.8. The mean grain sizes of the non-colored, colored, and monolithic zirconia were 233, 256, and 361 nm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The translucency of the zirconia was affected by the coloring procedure and the grain size. Although monolithic zirconia may not be the best esthetic material for the anterior region, it may serve as an alternative in the posterior region for the bilayered zirconia restorations. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2016-06 2016-06-17 /pmc/articles/PMC4919487/ /pubmed/27350851 http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.3.181 Text en © 2016 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Tuncel, İlkin
Turp, Işıl
Üşümez, Aslıhan
Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
title Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
title_full Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
title_fullStr Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
title_short Evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
title_sort evaluation of translucency of monolithic zirconia and framework zirconia materials
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4919487/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350851
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.3.181
work_keys_str_mv AT tuncelilkin evaluationoftranslucencyofmonolithiczirconiaandframeworkzirconiamaterials
AT turpisıl evaluationoftranslucencyofmonolithiczirconiaandframeworkzirconiamaterials
AT usumezaslıhan evaluationoftranslucencyofmonolithiczirconiaandframeworkzirconiamaterials