Private practice, Reunion Island, France.
Associate Professor, Prosthodontics Department, Dental Faculty, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; Head of Unit, Periodontology and Prosthodontics Unit, Saint Andre Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France.
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 May;131(5):812-818. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.01.027. Epub 2022 Apr 19.
The increasing use of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems has led to the development of resin-ceramic materials that meet the requirements of minimally invasive dentistry, including the resin nanoceramic (RNC) and polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN). The wear characteristics of these materials are unclear.
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the wear resistance of resin-ceramic materials when compared with one another or with lithium disilicate glass-ceramics.
The PubMed, Scopus, and DOSS search engines were used to identify articles published between 2013 and 2021. Two independent researchers conducted the systematic review by following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and by following a combination of keywords.
Of a total of 310 articles, 26 were selected, including only 1 clinical study. Among these, 15 compared resin-ceramic materials with each other, while 11 compared resin-ceramic materials with lithium disilicate ceramics. Two types of wear were used to compare the materials: attrition and abrasion. The most commonly studied materials were 2 RNCs (Lava Ultimate and Cerasmart), 1 PICN (Vita Enamic), and 1 ceramic (IPS e.max CAD). Among the resin-ceramic materials, the PICN (Vita Enamic) showed less wear than the RNCs. Of the RNCs, Cerasmart had less attrition wear and less wear of the opposing teeth.
Lithium disilicate glass-ceramics have a higher wear resistance than resin-ceramic materials, but they cause more wear of the opposing teeth.
计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造（CAD-CAM）系统的使用越来越多，导致了满足微创牙科要求的树脂陶瓷材料的发展，包括树脂纳米陶瓷（RNC）和聚合物渗透陶瓷网络（PICN）。这些材料的磨损特性尚不清楚。
本系统评价的目的是比较树脂陶瓷材料彼此之间以及与锂硅玻璃陶瓷相比的耐磨性。
使用 PubMed、Scopus 和 DOSS 搜索引擎检索 2013 年至 2021 年期间发表的文章。两名独立的研究人员按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）指南进行了系统评价，并结合关键词进行了研究。
在总共 310 篇文章中，选择了 26 篇，其中只有 1 项临床研究。其中，15 项研究比较了树脂陶瓷材料彼此之间的差异，11 项研究比较了树脂陶瓷材料与锂硅玻璃陶瓷的差异。两种磨损类型用于比较材料：磨耗和磨损。最常研究的材料是 2 种 RNC（Lava Ultimate 和 Cerasmart）、1 种 PICN（Vita Enamic）和 1 种陶瓷（IPS e.max CAD）。在树脂陶瓷材料中，PICN（Vita Enamic）的磨损小于 RNC。在 RNC 中，Cerasmart 的磨耗磨损较小，对牙的磨损较小。
锂硅玻璃陶瓷的耐磨性高于树脂陶瓷材料，但会导致对牙的磨损更大。
