Department of Prosthodontics, University of Iowa College of Dentistry and Dental Clinics, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, King Saud University College of Dentistry, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 May 29;59(6):1048. doi: 10.3390/medicina59061048.
This study aimed to compare the surface finish of milled leucite-reinforced ceramics polished with ceramic and composite polishing systems based on the manufacturers' recommendations. Sixty subtractive computer-aided manufactured (s-CAM) leucite-reinforced glass-ceramic specimens (IPS-Empress-CAD) were assigned into six groups: no polishing, a ceramic polishing kit, and four composite kit groups. The roughness average (Ra) was evaluated in microns using a profilometer, and scanning electron micrographs were obtained for qualitative analysis. A Tukey HSD posthoc test (α = 0.05) was used to determine significant intergroup differences. After surface evaluation of the ceramics, the Ra values of the polishing systems ranked OptraFine (0.41 ± 0.26) < Enhance (1.60 ± 0.54) < Shofu (2.14 ± 0.44) < Astropol (4.05 ± 0.72) < DiaComp (5.66 ± 0.62) < No Polishing (5.66 ± 0.74). Composite polishing systems did not provide as smooth surfaces as the ceramic polishing kit for CAD-CAM leucite-reinforced ceramics. Thus, using ceramic polishing systems, polishing leucite ceramics is recommended, whereas composite polishing systems should not be considered as an alternative for use in minimally invasive dentistry.
本研究旨在比较基于制造商建议使用陶瓷和复合抛光系统对铣削的透锂长石增强陶瓷进行抛光后的表面光洁度。将 60 个减法计算机辅助制造（s-CAM）透锂长石增强玻璃陶瓷样本（IPS-Empress-CAD）分为六组：无抛光、陶瓷抛光套件和四个复合套件组。使用轮廓仪以微米为单位评估粗糙度平均值（Ra），并获得用于定性分析的扫描电子显微镜照片。使用 Tukey HSD 事后检验（α = 0.05）确定组间的显著差异。对陶瓷进行表面评估后，抛光系统的 Ra 值排名为 OptraFine（0.41 ± 0.26）<Enhance（1.60 ± 0.54）<Shofu（2.14 ± 0.44）<Astropol（4.05 ± 0.72）<DiaComp（5.66 ± 0.62）<无抛光（5.66 ± 0.74）。复合抛光系统对 CAD-CAM 透锂长石增强陶瓷的抛光效果不如陶瓷抛光套件那样光滑。因此，建议使用陶瓷抛光系统对透锂长石陶瓷进行抛光，而复合抛光系统不应被视为在微创牙科中的替代选择。
