Cargando…

Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials

The aim of this work was to evaluate the influence of specimen preparation and test method on the flexural strength results of monolithic zirconia. Different monolithic zirconia materials (Ceramill Zolid (Amann Girrbach, Koblach, Austria), Zenostar ZrTranslucent (Wieland Dental, Pforzheim, Germany),...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schatz, Christine, Strickstrock, Monika, Roos, Malgorzata, Edelhoff, Daniel, Eichberger, Marlis, Zylla, Isabella-Maria, Stawarczyk, Bogna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5456702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28773307
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma9030180
_version_ 1783241350564544512
author Schatz, Christine
Strickstrock, Monika
Roos, Malgorzata
Edelhoff, Daniel
Eichberger, Marlis
Zylla, Isabella-Maria
Stawarczyk, Bogna
author_facet Schatz, Christine
Strickstrock, Monika
Roos, Malgorzata
Edelhoff, Daniel
Eichberger, Marlis
Zylla, Isabella-Maria
Stawarczyk, Bogna
author_sort Schatz, Christine
collection PubMed
description The aim of this work was to evaluate the influence of specimen preparation and test method on the flexural strength results of monolithic zirconia. Different monolithic zirconia materials (Ceramill Zolid (Amann Girrbach, Koblach, Austria), Zenostar ZrTranslucent (Wieland Dental, Pforzheim, Germany), and DD Bio zx(2) (Dental Direkt, Spenge, Germany)) were tested with three different methods: 3-point, 4-point, and biaxial flexural strength. Additionally, different specimen preparation methods were applied: either dry polishing before sintering or wet polishing after sintering. Each subgroup included 40 specimens. The surface roughness was assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and a profilometer whereas monoclinic phase transformation was investigated with X-ray diffraction. The data were analyzed using a three-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with respect to the three factors: zirconia, specimen preparation, and test method. One-way ANOVA was conducted for the test method and zirconia factors within the combination of two other factors. A 2-parameter Weibull distribution assumption was applied to analyze the reliability under different testing conditions. In general, values measured using the 4-point test method presented the lowest flexural strength values. The flexural strength findings can be grouped in the following order: 4-point < 3-point < biaxial. Specimens prepared after sintering showed significantly higher flexural strength values than prepared before sintering. The Weibull moduli ranged from 5.1 to 16.5. Specimens polished before sintering showed higher surface roughness values than specimens polished after sintering. In contrast, no strong impact of the polishing procedures on the monoclinic surface layer was observed. No impact of zirconia material on flexural strength was found. The test method and the preparation method significantly influenced the flexural strength values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5456702
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54567022017-07-28 Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials Schatz, Christine Strickstrock, Monika Roos, Malgorzata Edelhoff, Daniel Eichberger, Marlis Zylla, Isabella-Maria Stawarczyk, Bogna Materials (Basel) Article The aim of this work was to evaluate the influence of specimen preparation and test method on the flexural strength results of monolithic zirconia. Different monolithic zirconia materials (Ceramill Zolid (Amann Girrbach, Koblach, Austria), Zenostar ZrTranslucent (Wieland Dental, Pforzheim, Germany), and DD Bio zx(2) (Dental Direkt, Spenge, Germany)) were tested with three different methods: 3-point, 4-point, and biaxial flexural strength. Additionally, different specimen preparation methods were applied: either dry polishing before sintering or wet polishing after sintering. Each subgroup included 40 specimens. The surface roughness was assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and a profilometer whereas monoclinic phase transformation was investigated with X-ray diffraction. The data were analyzed using a three-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with respect to the three factors: zirconia, specimen preparation, and test method. One-way ANOVA was conducted for the test method and zirconia factors within the combination of two other factors. A 2-parameter Weibull distribution assumption was applied to analyze the reliability under different testing conditions. In general, values measured using the 4-point test method presented the lowest flexural strength values. The flexural strength findings can be grouped in the following order: 4-point < 3-point < biaxial. Specimens prepared after sintering showed significantly higher flexural strength values than prepared before sintering. The Weibull moduli ranged from 5.1 to 16.5. Specimens polished before sintering showed higher surface roughness values than specimens polished after sintering. In contrast, no strong impact of the polishing procedures on the monoclinic surface layer was observed. No impact of zirconia material on flexural strength was found. The test method and the preparation method significantly influenced the flexural strength values. MDPI 2016-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5456702/ /pubmed/28773307 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma9030180 Text en © 2016 by the authors; Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Schatz, Christine
Strickstrock, Monika
Roos, Malgorzata
Edelhoff, Daniel
Eichberger, Marlis
Zylla, Isabella-Maria
Stawarczyk, Bogna
Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials
title Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials
title_full Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials
title_fullStr Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials
title_full_unstemmed Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials
title_short Influence of Specimen Preparation and Test Methods on the Flexural Strength Results of Monolithic Zirconia Materials
title_sort influence of specimen preparation and test methods on the flexural strength results of monolithic zirconia materials
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5456702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28773307
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma9030180
work_keys_str_mv AT schatzchristine influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials
AT strickstrockmonika influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials
AT roosmalgorzata influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials
AT edelhoffdaniel influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials
AT eichbergermarlis influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials
AT zyllaisabellamaria influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials
AT stawarczykbogna influenceofspecimenpreparationandtestmethodsontheflexuralstrengthresultsofmonolithiczirconiamaterials