Two-Body Wear and Surface Roughness of CAD/CAM Esthetic Monolithic Block Materials using Chewing Simulation against Enamel Antagonists | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 18, Volume 68, Issue 4, October 2022, Page 3565-3578 PDF (989.17 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2022.149290.2177 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Hadil Sabry 1; Nehal Abouraya  2
| ||||
| 1Associate Professor, Associate Professor of Dental Materials, Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dentistry, October 6th University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Lecturer of Dental Materials, Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: Wear and surface roughness are major interacting properties that affect the function and appearance of esthetic CAD/CAM monolithic restorative materials and opposing natural dentition. Aim: Our research aimed to evaluate the wear and surface roughness of different esthetic monolithic CAD/CAM blocks and natural teeth antagonists before and after chewing simulation procedure. Three types of esthetic CAD /CAM block materials were included in this study, nano-ceramic resin (Lava Ultimate), polymer infiltrated ceramic (VITA Enamic), and a ceramic reinforced with lithium silicate and zirconia enriched (VITA Suprinity). Methodology: Twelve test samples were cut off as 2 mm thickness from size '14' blocks of each material, with a saw microtome. The polishing procedure was done according to the steps determined by the manufacturers. Enamel cusps from extracted human premolar teeth were used as antagonists. A chewing simulator was used to perform the 2-body wear test. Wear was quantified by weight loss and roughness measurement. Results: Lava Ultimate exhibited the highest wear and surface roughness while its antagonist showed the least wear and roughness. There was no difference between wear weight loss in Enamic and Suprinity. Enamic had higher roughness than Suprinity. Natural tooth antagonists of Suprinity had the highest wear and surface roughness compared to that of Lava Ultimate and Enamic. Conclusion: Lava Ultimate is the least material that produced wear or roughness in the natural antagonist thus considered the friendliest material, but Enamic can be recommended as CAD/CAM restorative material regarding the wear of the restoration and its antagonist. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| CAD/CAM monolithic esthetic blocks; Chewing Simulation; Surface Roughness; Two-Body Wear | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 166 PDF Download: 151 |
||||
