Masking ability of different ceramics upon various underlying structures.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate masking ability of different types and thicknesses of ceramics upon various substructures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Discs (Ø 12 mm, thickness 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, and 2.0 mm) were prepared from Bruxzir-Anterior® (Bc), Celtra-DUO® (Cc), and Vita-Suprinity® (Vc) (n = 15/group). Substructures (2 mm thickness) were prepared from natural dentine (Ds), tetracycline-stained dentine (Ts), zirconia (Zs), resin composite (Rs), and cast metal (Ms). A spectrophotometer was used to measure the CIE L*a*b* color coordinates of a specimen. Masking ability was determined from the color difference (∆E00 ) of ceramics between before- and after combining with substructure using ANOVA and Bonferroni test (α = 0.05). ∆E00 value was compared with acceptable clinical threshold (∆E00  = 1.8) and an ideal threshold (∆E00  = 0.8). RESULTS: Type-thickness of ceramics and substructures were significantly affected ∆E00 . Ts significantly influenced ∆E00 more than Rs, Ms, Zs, and Ds. No significant ∆E00 upon Ms and Zs was indicated. Bc completely masked Ts and Rs if thickness was ≥0.6 mm, and Zs, Ms, and Ds if ≥0.4 mm. Cc completely masked Ts and Rs if thickness was >1.6 mm, and Zs, Ms, and Ds if >1.4 mm. Vc completely masked Ts if thickness was >1.4 mm, Rs and Ms if >1.2 mm, and Zs and Ds if >1 mm. CONCLUSION: Ts is the most influential substructure impact on color appearance, requiring a minimum thickness of 0.6 mm Bc, 1.2 mm Vc, or 1.6 mm Cc to be perfectly masked. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Masking ability was significantly influenced by the type and thickness of ceramic material and underlying structure. Monolithic zirconia had a significantly higher masking ability than lithium silicate/phosphate glass ceramic. Ts indicated the most influencial substructure impacting the color appearance of ceramic restoration, which require a minimum thickness of 0.6 mm Bc, 1.2 mm Vc, or 1.6 mm Cc to achieve ideal masking capability.

Biaxial Flexural Strength of High-Translucence Monolithic Ceramics upon Various Thicknesses.

INTRODUCTION: High-translucence ceramics have been used increasingly. This study evaluated the biaxial flexural strength of different ceramics as a result of varying thicknesses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Circular discs with varied thickness of 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, and 2.0 mm were prepared from high-translucence yttria-partially stabilized zirconia (HTY-PSZ); Bruxzir® Anterior (Bc), and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) including Celtra® DUO (Cc) and VITA Suprinity® (Vc) (n = 15 discs/group). Biaxial flexural strength (σ) was evaluated utilizing piston-on-three-balls in a testing machine at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to determine the microscopic structure. ANOVA and multiple comparisons were analyzed for significant differences (a = 0.05). RESULTS: The mean ± sd value of σ (MPa) for thickness 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, and 2.0 mm was 672.66 ± 107.54, 655.93 ± 93.98, 589.01 ± 63.63, 624.89 ± 87.08, 618.82 ± 83.36, 672.64 ± 84.61, 659.81 ± 122.89, 632.79 ± 92.54, and 657.86 ± 73.17, for Bc; 477.64 ± 88.23, 496.39 ± 86.36, 461.56 ± 57.00, 450.26 ± 86.60, 468.28 ± 83.65, 472.45 ± 53.63, 453.05 ± 72.50, 462.67 ± 47.57, and 535.28 ± 84.33, for Cc; and 500.97 ± 76.36, 506.70 ± 87.76, 557.82 ± 62.78, 543.76 ± 87.29, 507.53 ± 86.09, 502.46 ± 64.75, 557.70 ± 80.91, 527.04 ± 80.78, and 499.88 ± 57.35, for Vc. A significant difference in flexural strength was indicated among groups (p < 0.05). Bc was significantly stronger than Cc and Vc (p < 0.05). Varying thickness did not have a significant influence on strength (p > 0.05). SEM revealed a tight arrangement of crystals for Bc and needle-like crystals diffusing in glass for Vc and Cc. CONCLUSION: Flexural strength of ceramics varied among types, but each retained strength equitably with varying thickness. HTY-PSZ was stronger than ZLS, but each was equally strong for thickness in the range of 0.4-2.0 mm.