Evaluation of translucency and strength of two glass ceramics after different surface treatments | ||||
| Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science | ||||
| Article 2, Volume 25, Issue 4, October 2022, Page 383-389 PDF (379.21 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ajdsm.2022.159194.1364 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Mennatallah Wahba   1; Tarek Morsi2; Arwa Mohamed3; Amr El-Etreby3
| ||||
| 1Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine. Future University in Egypt | ||||
| 2Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Objective: To investigate the effect of different surface treatments on the biaxial flexural strength and translucency of two different glass ceramics. Materials and Methods: Sixty disc-shaped specimens (10 mm x 0.3 mm) were divided into two groups (n=30) according to the type of the ceramic material; lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS E.max CAD), and leucite reinforced ceramic (IPS Empress CAD). Each group was divided into three subgroups (n=10) according to the surface treatment applied; whether hydrofluoric acid etching, sandblasting, or no treatment. Translucency Parameter was measured over black and white backgrounds using dental spectrophotometer VITA Easyshade Compact, while bi-axial flexural strength was measured using a ball on ring fixture test. Data was statistically analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc analysis (α = 0.05). Results: There was a significant difference (P <0.05) in translucency parameter between all surface treatments used for IPS E.max CAD groups, while for IPS Empress CAD there was a significant difference (P < 0.05) in translucency between both the control and hydrofluoric acid groups as well as between hydrofluoric acid and sandblasted groups. There was no significant difference in bi-axial flexural strength between different types of surface treatments used for IPS E.max CAD. IPS Empress CAD groups showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) only between the control and the hydrofluoric acid groups. Conclusions: IPS E.max CAD had higher translucency and biaxial flexural strength. Different surface treatments used affected the flexural strength and translucency negatively in both materials used. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Flexural strength; glass ceramics; lithium disilicate; translucency; surface treatments | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 158 PDF Download: 185 |
||||
