Gehrke Peter, Pietruska Maria Julia, Ladewig Johannes, Fischer Carsten, Sader Robert, Weigl Paul
Department of Postgraduate Education, Center for Dentistry and Oral Medicine (Carolinum), University Hospital, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Private Practice for Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
J Adv Prosthodont. 2024 Aug;16(4):231-243. doi: 10.4047/jap.2024.16.4.231. Epub 2024 Aug 20.
The objective of the study was to analyze the impact of cement, bonding pretreatment, and ceramic abutment material on the overall color results of CAD-CAM ceramic crowns bonded to titanium-based hybrid abutments.
For single implant restoration of a maxillary lateral incisor a total of 51 CAD-CAM-fabricated monolithic lithium disilicate crowns were fabricated and subsequently bonded onto 24 lithium disilicate Ti-base abutments, 24 zirconia Ti-base abutments and 3 resin abutment replicas as a control group. The 48 copings were cemented with three definitive and one provisional cement on both grit-blasted and non-blasted Ti-bases. The color of each restoration and surrounding artificial gingiva was measured spectrophotometrically at predefined measuring points and the CIELAB (ΔE) color scale values were recorded.
The color outcome of ceramic crowns bonded to hybrid abutments and soft tissues was affected differently by cements of different brands. Grit-blasting of Ti-bases prior to cementing CAD-CAM copings affected the color results of all-ceramic crowns. There was a significant difference ( = .038) for the median ΔE value between blasted and non-blasted reconstructions at the cervical aspect of the crown. Full-ceramic crowns on zirconia Ti-base abutments exhibited significantly lower ΔE values below the threshold of visibility (ΔE 1.8). In all subcategories tested, the use of a highly opaque temporary cement demonstrated the lowest median ΔE for both the crown and the artificial gingiva.
Various cements, core ceramic materials and airborne particle abrasion prior to bonding can adversely affect the color of Ti-base supported ceramic crowns and peri-implant soft tissue. However, zirconia CAD-CAM copings and an opaque cement can effectively mask this darkening.
本研究的目的是分析粘结剂、粘结预处理和陶瓷基台材料对粘结到钛基混合基台上的计算机辅助设计与制造(CAD-CAM)陶瓷冠整体颜色结果的影响。
对于上颌侧切牙的单颗种植修复,共制作了51个CAD-CAM制造的整块式二硅酸锂冠,随后粘结到24个二硅酸锂钛基基台、24个氧化锆钛基基台和3个树脂基台复制品上作为对照组。48个基底冠用三种最终粘结剂和一种临时粘结剂粘结在喷砂和未喷砂的钛基上。在预先定义的测量点用分光光度计测量每个修复体和周围人工牙龈的颜色,并记录CIELAB(ΔE)颜色标度值。
不同品牌的粘结剂对粘结到混合基台和软组织上的陶瓷冠的颜色结果有不同影响。在粘结CAD-CAM基底冠之前对钛基进行喷砂处理会影响全瓷冠的颜色结果。在冠的颈部方面,喷砂和未喷砂修复体的中位ΔE值存在显著差异(P = 0.038)。氧化锆钛基基台上的全瓷冠在可见度阈值(ΔE 1.8)以下表现出显著更低的ΔE值。在所有测试的子类别中,使用高度不透明的临时粘结剂时,冠和人工牙龈的中位ΔE均最低。
粘结前使用的各种粘结剂、核心陶瓷材料和空气颗粒研磨会对钛基支持的陶瓷冠和种植体周围软组织的颜色产生不利影响。然而,氧化锆CAD-CAM基底冠和不透明粘结剂可以有效掩盖这种变色。