The Effect of Application of Hydrofloric Acid To Cad-Cam Materials in Different Concentrations and Times on Color and Brightness
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2021
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Amaç: Günümüz diş hekimliğinde laminate veneerlerin yapımında sıklıkla CAD-CAM materyalleri tercih edilmektedir. Hidroflorik Asit laminate veneerlerin dişe simantasyonu aşamasında pürüzlendirme yöntemi olarak sıklıkla kullanılır. Bu çalışmada hidroflorik asidin, farklı konsantrasyon ve farklı sürelerde uygulanmasının laminate veneerlerin renk ve parlaklığına etkisini incelemektir. Materyal Metot: Çalışmada feldspatik seramik blok (Cerec Blok, Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, Bensheim, Almanya) lityum disilikat ile güçlendirilmiş seramik blok (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Lihteştayn) zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat bloklar (Vita Suprinity Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Almanya) 1mm kalınlığında 240 adet örnek olacak şekilde hassas kesim cihazı (Isomet-1000 Buehler, Illinois, ABD) ile hazırlandı. Örnekler rastgele 24 gruba ayrıldı. Gruplara %5 hidroflorik asit (IPS Seramik asit ajanı, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, lihtenştayn), %9 hidroflorik asit (Ultradent porselen asidi, South Jordan, ABD) ve 0, 20, 30, 60 sn. sürelerde ve sonrasında primer (Monobond Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, lihtenştayn) uygulaması yapıldı. Spektrofotometre (Vita Easyshade Advance 4.0, Bad Säckingen, Almanya) ile renk ölçümü yapıldı. Glossmetre (GQC6, Shenzhen, Çin) ile parlaklık ölçümü yapıldı. Veriler IBM SPSS V23 ile analiz edildi. ΔE00 ve P değerlerinin seramik, asit yüzdesi ve asitlenme süresine göre değişimleri 3 yönlü varyans analizi ile incelendi. Çoklu karşılaştırmalar Bonferroni düzeltmesi ile incelendi. Analiz sonuçları ortalama ve standart sapma olarak sunuldu. Önem düzeyi p<0,05 olarak alındı. Bulgular: Seramik türüne göre ortalama ΔE00 değeri farklılık göstermektedir. Vita suprinity grubunda daha yüksek sayısal değer gözlendi. ΔE00 değeri asit konsantrasyonu ve asitleme süresine göre farklılık göstermedi (p>0.5). P değeri seramiklere göre farklılık gösterdi. Tüm seramiklerde fark gözlendi; en yüksek değer e.max 'da elde edildi. Farklı asitleme süreleri için farklı değerler bulundu. En yüksek p değeri 0 sn. grubu içindir. 20 sn., 30 sn., 60 sn.nin sonuçları benzerdir. %9'luk HF Asit gruplarında %5'lik HF Asit gruplarına göre daha yüksek parlaklık değeri elde edildi (p>0.5). En yüksek ΔE00 renk farkı zirkonya ile güçlendirilmiş lityum silikat bloklar grubunda bulundu(2,322 ± 1,550). En düşük ΔE00 renk farkı lityum disilikat ile güçlendirilmiş seramik blok grubunda bulundu(1,017 ± 0,628). En yüksek p değeri lityum disilikat ile güçlendirilmiş seramik blok grubunda bulundu(10,101 ± 2,856). En düşük p değeri feldspatik seramik blokta bulundu(6,017 ± 2,591). Sonuç: Lityum disilikat ile güçlendirilmiş seramik blok grubunda en düşük ΔE00 renk farkı ve en yüksek p değeri bulundu. Lityum disilikat ile güçlendirilmiş seramik blok grubu renk değişimi ve parlaklık açısından en başarılı gruptur. Laminate veneer restorasyonlarda kullanımı önerilir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Tam seramik, hibrit seramik, hidroflorik asit, renk, parlaklık
Aim: The aim of the study is to examine the effect of hydrofluoric asid on the color and gloss of laminate veneers, which are frequently used in today's dentistry. Material Method: In the study, feldspathic ceramic block (Cerec Blok, Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic block (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) zirconia reinforced lithium silicate blocks (Vita Suprinity Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany) were prepared with a sensitive cutting device (Isomet-1000 Buehler, Illinois, USA) as 240 samples of 1mm thickness. The samples were randomly divided into 24 groups. 5% HF Acid (IPS ceramic etching agent, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), and 9% HF Acid (Ultradent porcelain etchig agent, South Jordan USA); It was applied in 0, 20, 30, 60 seconds. Afterwards, primer (Monobond Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) was applied. Color measurement was made with a spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade Advance 4.0, Bad Säckingen, Germany). Gloss measurement was made with a glossmeter (GQC6, Shenzhen, China). Data were analyzed with IBM SPSS V23. Variations of ΔE00 and P values according to ceramic, acid percentage and acidification time were analyzed by 3-way analysis of variance. Multiple comparisons were examined with Bonferroni correction. Analysis results were presented as mean and standard deviation. Significance level was taken as p<0.05. Results: The average ΔE00 value differs according to the type of ceramic. A higher value was observed in the Vita suprinity group. ΔE00 value differ according to the acid concentration and etching time (p> 0.5). The P value differed according to the ceramics. Difference was observed in all ceramics; The highest value was obtained in e.max. Different values were found for different etching times. The highest p value is for the 0 sec group. The results of 20 sec, 30 sec, 60 sec are similar. Higher brightness value was obtained in 9% HF Acid groups compared to 5% HF Acid groups (p>0.5). The highest ΔE00 color difference was found in the group of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate blocks (2,322 ± 1,550). The lowest ΔE00 color difference was found in the lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic block group (1.017 ± 0.628). The highest p value was found in the lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic block group. (10.101 ± 2.856). The lowest p value was found in the feldspathic ceramic block (6,017 ± 2,591). Conclusions: The lowest ΔE00 color difference and the highest p value were found in the ceramic block group reinforced with lithium disilicate. Ceramic block group reinforced with lithium disilicate is the most successful group in terms of color change and brightness. Recommended for laminate veneer restorations. Keywords: All ceramic, Hybrid ceramics, hydrofluoric acid, color, value
Aim: The aim of the study is to examine the effect of hydrofluoric asid on the color and gloss of laminate veneers, which are frequently used in today's dentistry. Material Method: In the study, feldspathic ceramic block (Cerec Blok, Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic block (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) zirconia reinforced lithium silicate blocks (Vita Suprinity Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany) were prepared with a sensitive cutting device (Isomet-1000 Buehler, Illinois, USA) as 240 samples of 1mm thickness. The samples were randomly divided into 24 groups. 5% HF Acid (IPS ceramic etching agent, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), and 9% HF Acid (Ultradent porcelain etchig agent, South Jordan USA); It was applied in 0, 20, 30, 60 seconds. Afterwards, primer (Monobond Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) was applied. Color measurement was made with a spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade Advance 4.0, Bad Säckingen, Germany). Gloss measurement was made with a glossmeter (GQC6, Shenzhen, China). Data were analyzed with IBM SPSS V23. Variations of ΔE00 and P values according to ceramic, acid percentage and acidification time were analyzed by 3-way analysis of variance. Multiple comparisons were examined with Bonferroni correction. Analysis results were presented as mean and standard deviation. Significance level was taken as p<0.05. Results: The average ΔE00 value differs according to the type of ceramic. A higher value was observed in the Vita suprinity group. ΔE00 value differ according to the acid concentration and etching time (p> 0.5). The P value differed according to the ceramics. Difference was observed in all ceramics; The highest value was obtained in e.max. Different values were found for different etching times. The highest p value is for the 0 sec group. The results of 20 sec, 30 sec, 60 sec are similar. Higher brightness value was obtained in 9% HF Acid groups compared to 5% HF Acid groups (p>0.5). The highest ΔE00 color difference was found in the group of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate blocks (2,322 ± 1,550). The lowest ΔE00 color difference was found in the lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic block group (1.017 ± 0.628). The highest p value was found in the lithium disilicate reinforced ceramic block group. (10.101 ± 2.856). The lowest p value was found in the feldspathic ceramic block (6,017 ± 2,591). Conclusions: The lowest ΔE00 color difference and the highest p value were found in the ceramic block group reinforced with lithium disilicate. Ceramic block group reinforced with lithium disilicate is the most successful group in terms of color change and brightness. Recommended for laminate veneer restorations. Keywords: All ceramic, Hybrid ceramics, hydrofluoric acid, color, value
Description
Keywords
Diş Hekimliği, CAD/CAM, Dental materyaller, Dental porselen, Diş renk değişikliği, Dişler, Hidroflorik asit, Parlaklık, Renk değişikliği, Dentistry, CAD/CAM, Dental materials, Dental porcelain, Tooth discoloration, Teeth, Hydrofluoric acid, Brightness, Color change
Turkish CoHE Thesis Center URL
WoS Q
Scopus Q
Source
Volume
Issue
Start Page
End Page
103