Alternativas de tratamientos de superficie para adhesión de cerámica de disilicado de litio / Alternatives of surface treatments for adhesion of lithium disilicate ceramics

Introduction: the clinical success of a restoration is strongly associated with the quality and durability of the ceramic-cement resin interface. In order to obtain an adequate union between these materials of different nature surface treatments are used and achieve mechanical retention or chemical interaction. Objectives: to check if any method promotes a true chemical bond between lithium disilicate ceramics and resin cement. As well as determineif there is any treatment that reports bonding values comparable to hydrofluoric acid and silane (gold standard). Methods: a systematic literature review was developed based on the PRISMA strategy, where the databases were searched: Science Direct, Pubmed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Springer Journal, SciELO with MeSH and free terms from 2005 to November 2016 for articles in English and Spanish on surface treatments for lithium disilicate. Results: from 58 publications selected a sample of 21 articles. Two articles reported high risk of bias. Conclusions: hydrofluoric acid and silane continue to be the method with the highest and most reliable adhesion values in the literature. Universal adhesives are an alternative to promote chemical adhesion additional to the silane. Diamond burs, Nd: YAG and Er: YAG laser are not recommended as surface treatments(AU)

Introducción: el éxito clínico de una restauración se asocia fuertemente a la calidad y duración de la interface cerámica-cemento resinoso. Para que exista una adecuada unión entre estos materiales de distinta naturaleza se emplean tratamientos de superficie para lograr una buena retención mecánica o interacción química. Objetivos: revisar si algún método promueve una verdadera adhesión química entre la cerámica de disilicato de litio y el cemento resinoso, así como determinar si existe algún tratamiento que reporte valores de unión comparables al ácido fluorhídrico y silano (patrón de oro). Métodos: se desarrolló una revisión sistemática de literatura basada en la estrategia PRISMA, donde se buscó en las bases de datos: Science Direct, Pubmed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Springer Journal, SciELO con términos MeSH y libres desde el 2005 a noviembre de 2016 para artículos en inglés y español sobre tratamientos de superficie para disilicato de litio. Resultados: de 58 publicaciones, se seleccionó una muestra de 21 artículos. Dos artículos reportaron riesgo de sesgo alto. Conclusiones: el ácido fluorhídrico y silano continúan siendo el método con los valores de adhesión más altos y confiables de la literatura. Los adhesivos universales son una alternativa para promover adhesión química adicional al silano. Fresas diamantadas, laser Nd: YAG y Er:YAG no se recomienda como tratamientos de superficie(AU)

Clinical effects of full crown prosthesis on anterior teeth / 中华医学美学美容杂志

Objective To evaluate the clinical effects of anterior teeth repair of three different restorations made of Co-Cr alloy,Ag-Pd alloy and all-ceramic crowns.Methods 90 cases who needed the both maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth restarations were selected and treated respectively with Co-Cr alloy porcelain fused to metal crowns (PFM)(60 teeth),Ag-Pd alloy PFM (46 teeth)and IPS e.max Press Porcelain full crown (38 teeth).Gingival index was observed before restoration and in 6 and 12 months after restoration.Meanwhile,clinical indicators of two restorations were evaluated as cervical margin's coloration,margin fitness degree,color of restorations,fracture of restorations and contour of restorations,etc.Results The healthy condition of gingiva in groups of Ag-Pd alloy PFM and IPS e.max Press Porcelain full crown were superior to the group of Co-Cr alloy PFM (P＜0.05).There was no cervical margin's coloration in groug of all-ceramic PFM.The color and contour of this group was superior to the group of Co-Cr alloy PFM (P ＜0.05).The significant difference between group of Co Cr alloy and group of Ag-Pd alloy was cervical margin's coloration and marginal density of the restoration (P＜0.05).Conclusions The clinical effects of both groups of Ag-Pd alloy PFM and IPS e.max Press Porcelain full crown is superior to the group of Co-Cr alloy PFM.The IPS e.max Press Porcelain full crown group works best.

In vitro study of wear of Ceramage and IPS e.max Press / 口腔疾病防治

Objective @#To compare the wear of Ceramage and IPS e.max Press offering foundation for nonmetallic materials selection in clinical. @*Methods @#20 class I cavities were prepared in the approximal flattened sides of the extracted human maxillary first molars. The cavities were divided into 2 groups randomly, and then restored with Ceramage or IPS e.max Press. Inlays were prepared according to the manufactures’ instructions with indirect methods and cemented with Varolink N. The non-wear extracted maxillary third molars were used as antagonistic enamel cusps after standardized prepared. After the self-made wear-testing device concluded 200,000 cycles under a load of 20 N, the wear depth of specimens and antagonistic enamel cusps was assessed by Kavo PREP assistant.@*Results @# The wear in Ceramage group was (298.30 ± 40.02) μm, while the wear of normal enamel was (206.60 ± 49.17) μm. The wear in IPS e.max Press group was (212.90 ± 61.21) μm, while the wear of normal enamel was (217.00 ± 25.10) μm. The wear of IPS e.max Press inlays was higher than Ceramage inlays (P < 0.05). Ceramage inlays showed higher wear than normal enamel (P < 0.05), while IPS e.max Press inlays was not statistically different from the normal enamel (P > 0.05). @*Conclusions @#Ceramage has more wear than IPS e.max Press. Ceramage shows higher wear compared with normal enamel, while IPS e.max Press has lower antagonistic war compared with normal enamel.

Assessment of clinical effect of IPS e. max press ceramic endocrowns in preserving endodontically treated molars / 中华医学美学美容杂志

Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of IPSe. max press ceramic endocrowns being used in preserving endodontically treated molars. Methods Forty-five endodontically treated molars were selected from 45 patients in this study. All the molars had been endodontically treated and performed with ultrasonic scaling. After 1-2 weeks, the crowns and pulp chambers were prepared. The impressions and master casts were gained and IPSe. max press ceramic endocrowns were fabricated in the lab. The endocrowns were cemented with resin cement. The further consultations were offered to these molars after 6 months and 1 year. The difference of sulcus bleeding index among these endodontically treated molars and the same teeth in the opposite sides was compared. Results In these cases, 100 % of endocrowns were

An in-vitro wear study of human enamel opposing heat-pressed ceramics / 대한치과보철학회지

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the wear characteristics of human enamel opposing 2 heat-pressed ceramics (e.max Press and Empress Esthetic), conventional feldspathic porcelain (Ceramco 3) and type III gold alloy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Intact cusps of extracted premolars were used for enamel specimens. Five disk samples were made for each of two heat-pressed ceramics groups, conventional feldspathic porcelain group and type III gold alloy group. Wear tests were conducted in distilled water using a pin-on-disk tribometer. The amount of enamel wear was determined by weighing the enamel specimens before and after wear tests, and the weight was converted to volumes by average density. The wear tracks were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and surface profilometer to elucidate the wear characteristics. RESULTS: 1. Ceramco 3 led to the greatest amount of enamel wear followed by Empress Esthetic, e.max Press and type III gold alloy. However, there was no significant difference between Ceramco 3 and Empress Esthetic (P > .05), and there were also no significant differences among Empress Esthetic, e.max Press and type III gold alloy (P > .05). 2. The average surface roughness of e.max Press after wear test was smallest followed by Empress Esthetic and Ceramco 3, but there was no significant difference between Empress Esthetic and Ceramco 3 (P > .05). 3. There were no significant differences among the depth of wear tracks of all the groups (P > .05). The group that showed the largest width of wear track was Ceramco 3 followed by Empress Esthetic, e.max Press and type III gold alloy. However, there was no significant difference between e.max Press and Empress Esthetic (P > .05), and there was also no significant difference between Empress Esthetic and Ceramco 3 (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this study, heat-pressed ceramics were not more abrasive than conventional feldspathic porcelain.