The effect of chewing simulation on surface roughness of resin composite when opposed by zirconia ceramic and lithium disilicate ceramic.

OBJECTIVE To assess the change in surface roughness of nanohybrid resin composite (Tetric EvoCeram) after antagonist wear against monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramics through a simulated chewing test using a three-dimensional (3D) profilometer. METHODS A total of 40 Tetric EvoCeram™ resin composite specimens against either a Lava™ Plus zirconia antagonist (n=20) or IPS e.max Press lithium disilicate antagonist (n=20) were prepared for the study. The surface roughness profiles of each resin composite before and after an in-vitro simulated chewing test were analysed using a 3D profilometer and Talymap software. After the simulated chewing, the surface profiles of representative Tetric EvoCeram specimens from each group were analysed using scanning electron microscopy. Independent t-test and paired t-test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS For both lithium disilicate and zirconia groups, all surface roughness parameters (Ra, Rt, Sa, Sq,) of Tetric EvoCeram were significantly higher post-chewing compared to pre-chewing (p<0.05); the post-chewing surface roughness parameters of Tetric EvoCeram for the lithium disilicate group were significantly higher (p<0.05) than in the zirconia group. SIGNIFICANCE This chewing simulation test showed that Tetric EvoCeram composites exhibited a rougher surface when opposing lithium disilicate ceramic compared to opposing zirconia ceramic.

[1]  W. Johnston,et al.  The Surface Roughness and Gloss of Composites , 1984, Journal of dental research.

[2]  Ernesto Borgia,et al.  Quality and Survival of Direct Light‐Activated Composite Resin Restorations in Posterior Teeth: A 5‐ to 20‐Year Retrospective Longitudinal Study , 2019, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[3]  P Lambrechts,et al.  Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. , 1997, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[4]  M Quirynen,et al.  The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra- and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of the literature. , 2005 .

[5]  Sangwon Park,et al.  Antagonist wear of three CAD/CAM anatomic contour zirconia ceramics. , 2014, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[6]  Gergo Mitov,et al.  Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures. , 2012, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[7]  M. Georgescu,et al.  Enamel wear caused by three different restorative materials. , 1995, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[8]  F. Barbakow,et al.  Chewing Pressure us. Wear of Composites and Opposing Enamel Cusps , 1992, Journal of dental research.

[9]  Yong-Keun Lee,et al.  Changes in gloss after simulated generalized wear of composite resins. , 2005, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[10]  J. W. Farah,et al.  Comparative reliability analyses of zirconium oxide and lithium disilicate restorations in vitro and in vivo. , 2011, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[11]  M. Burrow,et al.  Comparison between published clinical success of direct resin composite restorations in vital posterior teeth in 1995–2005 and 2006–2016 periods , 2017, Australian dental journal.

[12]  P. Lambrechts,et al.  How to simulate wear? Overview of existing methods. , 2006, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[13]  Á. Della Bona,et al.  Zirconia as a Dental Biomaterial , 2015, Materials.

[14]  Eduardo Piza Pellizzer,et al.  Survival of all-ceramic restorations after a minimum follow-up of five years: A systematic review. , 2016, Quintessence international.

[15]  Sang‐Wan Shin,et al.  A study on the in-vitro wear of the natural tooth structure by opposing zirconia or dental porcelain , 2010, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[16]  A. Ekfeldt,et al.  Changes of masticatory movement characteristics after prosthodontic rehabilitation of individuals with extensive tooth wear. , 1996, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[17]  A retrospective audit of the outcome of composites used to restore worn teeth , 2017, BDJ.

[18]  D. Watts,et al.  Surface characterization of modern resin composites: a multitechnique approach. , 2005, American journal of dentistry.

[19]  K. Söderholm,et al.  Water and Abrasive Effects on Three-body Wear of Composites , 1991, Journal of dental research.

[20]  J. Powers,et al.  Effect of surface roughness on stain resistance of dental resin composites. , 2005, Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.].

[21]  W. Douglas,et al.  The wear of dental amalgam in an artificial mouth: a clinical correlation. , 1985, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[22]  Takuo Tanaka,et al.  Wear evaluation of porcelain opposing gold, composite resin, and enamel. , 2006, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[23]  G. Willems,et al.  The Surface Roughness of Enamel-to-Enamel Contact Areas Compared with the Intrinsic Roughness of Dental Resin Composites , 1991, Journal of dental research.

[24]  K. J. Stout,et al.  Comprehensive study of parameters for characterising three- dimensional surface topography: III: Parameters for characterising amplitude and some functional properties , 1994 .

[25]  Martin Rosentritt,et al.  Wear performance of dental ceramics after grinding and polishing treatments. , 2012, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials.

[26]  Deog-Gyu Seo,et al.  Wear evaluation of the human enamel opposing different Y-TZP dental ceramics and other porcelains. , 2012, Journal of dentistry.

[27]  G. Carlsson,et al.  Rehabilitation of the worn dentition. , 2008, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[28]  M. Behr,et al.  Two-body wear of dental porcelain and substructure oxide ceramics , 2011, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[29]  Charles J Goodacre,et al.  Clinical complications in fixed prosthodontics. , 2003, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[30]  M. Kern,et al.  Two-body wear of different ceramic materials opposed to zirconia ceramic. , 2010, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[31]  S. Heintze.  How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods. , 2006, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[32]  I. Krejci,et al.  Wear and marginal adaptation of composite resin inlays. , 1994, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[33]  V. Rousson,et al.  Wear of ceramic and antagonist--a systematic evaluation of influencing factors in vitro. , 2008, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[34]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Sliding contact fracture of dental ceramics: Principles and validation. , 2014, Acta biomaterialia.

[35]  A. Altaie,et al.  An approach to understanding tribological behaviour of dental composites through volumetric wear loss and wear mechanism determination; beyond material ranking. , 2017, E -journal of dentistry.

[36]  K. Ludwig,et al.  Wear of composite resin veneering materials and enamel in a chewing simulator. , 2007, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[37]  V. Rousson,et al.  Correlation of wear in vivo and six laboratory wear methods. , 2012, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[38]  V. Rousson,et al.  Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials , 2007, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[39]  M. Kern,et al.  Wear of composite resin veneering materials in a dual-axis chewing simulator. , 1999, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[40]  L. Valandro,et al.  Surface roughness and bacterial adherence to resin composites and ceramics. , 2009, Oral health & preventive dentistry.

[41]  M Heller,et al.  Mechanical properties and short-term in-vivo evaluation of yttrium-oxide-partially-stabilized zirconia. , 1989, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[42]  B. K. Moore,et al.  The effects of enamel wear on the metal-porcelain interface. , 1983, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[43]  D. Watts,et al.  Effect of nanofillers' size on surface properties after toothbrush abrasion. , 2009, American journal of dentistry.

[44]  H. Shintani,et al.  Effects of various finishing methods on staining and accumulation of Streptococcus mutans HS-6 on composite resins. , 1985, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[45]  A. Mehl,et al.  Wear evaluation of MZ100 compared to ceramic CAD/CAM materials. , 2001, International Journal of Computerized Dentistry.

[46]  O. Addison,et al.  Data acquisition variability using profilometry to produce accurate mean total volumetric wear and mean maximum wear depth measurements for the OHSU oral wear simulator. , 2016, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[47]  V. Rousson,et al.  Laboratory mechanical parameters of composite resins and their relation to fractures and wear in clinical trials-A systematic review. , 2017, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[48]  W. Eames,et al.  Plaque accumulation on composite surfaces after various finishing procedures. , 1975, Oral health.

[49]  Julie A. Holloway,et al.  Ceramics for Dental Applications: A Review , 2010, Materials.

[50]  P. Lambrechts,et al.  Quantitative in vivo Wear of Human Enamel , 1989, Journal of dental research.

[51]  Wolfram Höland,et al.  Ceramics as biomaterials for dental restoration , 2008, Expert review of medical devices.

[52]  M. Kern,et al.  Wear resistance of nanofilled composite resin and feldspathic ceramic artificial teeth. , 2008, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[53]  W. Johnston,et al.  Effect of simulated mastication on the surface roughness of three ceramic systems. , 2015, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.