Mederos M, de León CME, Tessore R, García A, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Grazioli PGS

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page:
PDF size: 426.70 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Differences in the mechanical properties of ceramic and resin-based materials pose the question of which of the two will perform better in the long run.
Objectives: Evaluate the flexural resistance and color stability of different indirect esthetic restorative materials.
Methods: The materials selected were Filtek™ Z250 XT (3M ESPE), Ceramage (SHOFU Dental), VITA VM® LC and VITA ENAMIC® (VITA Zahnfabrik), IPS e.max® (Ivoclar-Vivadent) and Zolid FX (Amann Girrbach AG). The flexural resistance assay (n = 10) was conducted in a universal mechanical testing machine. Color readings (n = 5) were taken with a VITA Easyshade V® spectrophotometer.
Results: All-ceramic materials had better mechanical performance (p < 0.001). Color stability results show that Ceramage, IPS e.max® and Zolid FX displayed a statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.002) with respect to Filtek Z250 XT, VITA VM® LC and VITA ENAMIC®.
Conclusions: All-ceramic materials exhibited greater flexural resistance and color stability than polymer-based materials. However, indirect esthetic materials with polymers in their composition, such as Ceramage, are presented as a valid alternative, due to their appropriate mechanical properties and their color stability, which is similar to that of ceramic materials.

REFERENCES

1. Smithson J, Newsome P, Reaney D, Owen S. Direct or indirect restorations? Int Dent. 2011 [acceso: 13/11/2020]; 1(1):70-80. Disponible en: Disponible en: http://www.moderndentistrymedia.com/may_june2011/smithson_newsome.pdf

2. Pjetursson BE, Valente NA, Strasding M, Zwahlen M, Liu S, Sailer I. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of zirconia‐ceramic and metal‐ceramic single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(S16):199-214. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13306

3. Belli R, Geinzer E, Muschweck A, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Mechanical fatigue degradation of ceramics versus resin composites for dental restorations. Dent Mater. 2014;30(4):424-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2014.01.003

4. Demarco FF, Collares K, Correa MB, Cenci MS, Morales RR de, Opdam NJ. Should my composite restorations last forever? Why are they failing? Braz Oral Res. 2017;31(suppl 1). DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0056

5. Edelhoff D, Özcan M. To what extent does the longevity of fixed dental prostheses depend on the function of the cement? Working Group 4 materials: cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18:193-204. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01442.x

6. Fron Chabouis H, Smail Faugeron V, Attal J-P. Clinical efficacy of composite versus ceramic inlays and onlays: A systematic review. Dent Mater. 2013;29(12):1209-18.

7. Saba DA, Salama RA, Haridy R. Effect of different beverages on the color stability and microhardness of CAD/CAM hybrid versus feldspathic ceramic blocks: An in-vitro study. Futur Dent J. 2017;3(2):61-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.fdj.2017.07.001

8. Morimoto S, Rebello de Sampaio FBW, Braga MM, Sesma N, Özcan M. Survival Rate of Resin and Ceramic Inlays, Onlays, and Overlays. J Dent Res. 2016;95(9):985-94. DOI: 10.1177/0022034516652848

9. International Organization for Standarization. ISO 4049:2009 Dentistry Polymer based restorative materials. 2009 [acceso: 13/11/2020]. Disponible en: Disponible en: https://www.iso.org/standard/67596.html

10. Yap A, Eweis A, Yahya N. Dynamic and Static Flexural Appraisal of Resin-based Composites: Comparison of the ISO and Mini-flexural Tests. Oper Dent. 2018;43(5):E223-31. DOI: 10.2341/17-224-L

11. Grazioli G, Francia A, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Zanchi CH, Moraes RR De. Simple and Low-Cost Thermal Treatments on Direct Resin Composites for Indirect Use. Braz Dent J. 2019;30(3):279-84. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201902473

12. Sharma G, Wu W, Dalal EN. The CIEDE2000 color-difference formula: Implementation notes, supplementary test data, and mathematical observations. Color Res Appl. 2005;30(1):21-30. DOI: 10.1002/col.20070

13. Paravina RD, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ, Bona AD, Igiel C, Linninger M, et al. Color Difference Thresholds in Dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 20150;27:S1-9. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12149

14. International Organization for Standarization. ISO 6872:2015 Dentistry - ceramic materials. International Organization for Standadization. 2015 [acceso: 13/11/2020]. Disponible en: Disponible en: https://www.iso.org/standard/59936.html

15. Tavares L do N, Zancopé K, Silva ACA, Raposo LHA, Soares CJ, Neves FD das. Microstructural and mechanical analysis of two CAD-CAM lithium disilicate glass-reinforced ceramics. Braz Oral Res. 2020;34. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0004

16. Bociong K, Szczesio A, Krasowski M, Sokolowski J. The influence of filler amount on selected properties of new experimental resin dental composite. Open Chem. 2018 [acceso: 13/11/2020]; 16(1):905-11. Disponible en: Disponible en: https://www.x-mol.com/paperRedirect/1225067476905672704

17. Cuevas-Suárez CE, Meereis CTW, D’accorso N, Macchi R, Ancona-Meza AL, Zamarripa-Calderón E. Effect of radiant exposure and UV accelerated aging on physico-chemical and mechanical properties of composite resins. J Appl Oral Sci. 2019;27. DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0075

18. Acar O, Yilmaz B, Altintas SH, Chandrasekaran I, Johnston WM. Color stainability of CAD/CAM and nanocomposite resin materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(1):71-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.06.014

19. Poggio C, Ceci M, Beltrami R, Mirando M, Wassim J, Colombo M. Color stability of esthetic restorative materials: a spectrophotometric analysis. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2016;2(1):95-101. DOI: 10.1080/23337931.2016.1217416

20. Heintze SD, Ilie N, Hickel R, Reis A, Loguercio A, Rousson V. Laboratory mechanical parameters of composite resins and their relation to fractures and wear in clinical trials-A systematic review. Dent Mater. 2017;33(3):e101-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.11.013