Comparison of four monolithic zirconia materials with conventional ones: Contrast ratio, grain size, four-point flexural strength and two-body wear.

OBJECTIVES

To test the mechanical and optical properties of monolithic zirconia in comparison to conventional zirconia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Specimens were prepared from: monolithic zirconia: Zenostar (ZS), DD Bio ZX(2) hochtransluzent (DD), Ceramill Zolid (CZ), InCoris TZI (IC) and a conventional zirconia Ceramill ZI (CZI). Contrast ratio (N=75/n=15) was measured according to ISO 2471:2008. Grain sizes (N=75/n=15) were investigated with scanning electron microscope. Four-point flexural strength (N=225/n=15/zirconia and aging regime) was measured initially, after aging in autoclave or chewing simulator (ISO 13356:2008). Two-body wear of polished and glazed/veneered specimens (N=108/n=12) was analyzed in a chewing simulator using human teeth as antagonists. Data were analyzed using 2-/1-way ANOVA with post-hoc Scheffé, Kruskal-Wallis-H, Mann-Whitney-U, Spearman-Rho, Weibull statistics and linear mixed models (p<0.05).

RESULTS

The lowest contrast ratio values were found for ZS and IC and CZ. IC showed the largest grain size followed by DD and CZI. The smallest grain size was observed for ZS followed by CZ. There was no correlation between grain size and contrast ratio. The aging regime showed no impact on flexural strength. All non-aged and autoclave-aged specimens showed lower flexural strengths than the control group CZI. Within groups aged in chewing simulator, ZS showed significantly lower flexural strength than CZI. CZI showed higher material and antagonist wear than monolithic polished and glazed groups. Glazed specimens showed higher material and antagonist loss compared to polished ones. There was no correlation between roughness and wear.

CONCLUSIONS

Monolithic zirconia showed higher optical, but lower mechanical properties than conventional zirconia.