Suppr超能文献

三种超低熔合牙科陶瓷抛光系统的比较。

Comparison of three systems for the polishing of an ultra-low fusing dental porcelain.

作者信息

Wright Michael D, Masri Radi, Driscoll Carl F, Romberg Elaine, Thompson Geoffrey A, Runyan Dennis A

机构信息

Baltimore College of Dental Surgery, University of Maryland at Baltimore, 666 West Baltimore Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2004 Nov;92(5):486-90. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.07.021.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

With the introduction of newer dental porcelains, there exists the need to evaluate different porcelain polishing systems available on the market.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the surface roughness produced by 3 different porcelain polishing systems on an ultra-low fusing porcelain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty-three ultra-low fusing porcelain (Finesse) discs (10 x 2 mm) were fabricated and randomly divided into 3 groups (n=21). Both sides of each disc were abraded with a medium-grit diamond bur. One side was autoglazed and was considered a control. The other side was polished until the surface appeared shiny to the naked eye using 1 of 3 porcelain polishing kits (Axis Dental, Jelenko, and Brasseler systems). The surface of each disc was evaluated quantitatively with surface profilometry and qualitatively using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). A mean roughness profile (Ra) value was determined for each side of each specimen to describe the overall roughness of the surface. The Ra mean difference for each specimen was determined by subtracting the mean experimental readings (polished surface) from the mean control readings (glazed surface) and was used for the statistical analysis. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance followed by a Tukey multiple comparison test (alpha=.05). Representative specimens from each group were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy.

RESULTS

The Axis porcelain polishing system produced a smoother surface than the Brasseler or Jelenko systems (0.586 +/- 0.256, 0.306 +/- 0.238, and 0.277 +/- 0.230, respectively). No significant difference was found between the Jelenko and Brasseler porcelain polishing kits (F=10.6, P <.001). The images obtained through SEM were evaluated and found to be consistent with the profilometer readings.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this study, all 3 porcelain polishing systems produced a surface smoother than the autoglazed surface of Finesse. The Axis system provided a significantly smoother surface compared to the Brasseler and Jelenko polishing systems.

摘要

问题陈述

随着新型牙科陶瓷的推出,有必要评估市场上现有的不同陶瓷抛光系统。

目的

本研究的目的是比较三种不同陶瓷抛光系统在超低熔陶瓷上产生的表面粗糙度。

材料与方法

制作63个超低熔陶瓷(Finesse)圆盘(10×2mm),随机分为3组(n = 21)。每个圆盘的两面用中粒度金刚石车针进行研磨。一面进行自上釉处理,作为对照。另一面使用三种陶瓷抛光套件(Axis Dental、Jelenko和Brasseler系统)中的一种进行抛光,直到表面肉眼看起来有光泽。每个圆盘的表面通过表面轮廓仪进行定量评估,并使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)进行定性评估。确定每个样本每一面的平均粗糙度轮廓(Ra)值,以描述表面的整体粗糙度。每个样本的Ra平均差值通过从平均对照读数(上釉表面)中减去平均实验读数(抛光表面)来确定,并用于统计分析。数据采用方差分析,随后进行Tukey多重比较检验(α = 0.05)。通过扫描电子显微镜对每组的代表性样本进行评估。

结果

Axis陶瓷抛光系统产生的表面比Brasseler或Jelenko系统更光滑(分别为0.586±0.256、0.306±0.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验