Abstract
Statement of problem
Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology and the
improved translucency of recently developed high-strength monolithic zirconia could
make them clinically acceptable for veneers if bonding to zirconia was as predictable
as to glass-ceramics. Few studies have compared how resin cements behave between glass-ceramic
and zirconia veneers before and after polymerization.
Purpose
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the volumetric polymerization shrinkage
of resin cement, marginal discrepancy, and cement thickness before and after polymerization
for glass-ceramic and zirconia veneers with light-polymerizing resin cement.
Material and methods
Ten lithium disilicate veneers and 10 zirconia veneers were fabricated with a CAD-CAM
workflow on extracted human maxillary anterior teeth with intact enamel surfaces.
Zirconia veneers were treated with airborne-particle abrasion, and lithium disilicate
veneers were etched with 5% hydrofluoric acid. All specimens were treated with ceramic
primer and cemented with a light-polymerized resin cement. All specimens were scanned
before and after resin cement polymerization by microcomputed tomography. The data
were processed by the Amira software program to compare polymerization volumetric
shrinkage, cement thickness, and marginal discrepancy. The data were compared by using
a t test and analysis of variance (α=.05). Two bonded veneers were loaded in a mastication
simulator for 400 000 cycles to investigate the effect of cyclic fatigue loading.
Results
Mean volumetric polymerization shrinkage was 4.2 ±0.8% for the lithium disilicate
group and 6.4 ±3.5% for the zirconia group. No significant difference was found for
volumetric shrinkage between materials (P=.132). The mean ±standard deviations of the marginal discrepancies before and after
polymerization were 178 ±41 μm and 158 ±37 μm for lithium disilicate and 115 ±33 μm
and 107 ±32 μm for zirconia. A smaller marginal discrepancy was found for both materials
after polymerization (P=.011) and for zirconia compared with lithium disilicate (P=.004). The mean ±standard deviation cement thickness values before and after polymerization
were 157 ±27 μm and 147 ±27 μm for lithium disilicate and 162 ±53 μm and 147 ±52 μm
for zirconia. Smaller cement thickness was found after polymerization (P<.001), whereas no significant difference was found in cement thickness between materials
(P=.144). No changes were noted in marginal discrepancy and cement thickness as a result
of the fatigue loading.
Conclusions
The difference in the volumetric polymerization shrinkage of cement between lithium
disilicate and zirconia veneers was not statistically significant. Polymerization
shrinkage resulted in smaller marginal discrepancy and cement thickness for both veneer
materials.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic DentistryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Porcelain laminate veneers bonded to etched enamel.Dent Clin North Am. 1983; 27: 671-684
- Making yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia translucent.Dent Mater. 2014; 30: 1195-1203
- A comparative evaluation of the translucency of zirconias and lithium disilicate for monolithic restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116: 257-263
- Bonding of resin-based luting cements to zirconia with and without the use of ceramic priming agents.J Adhes Dent. 2012; 14: 385-392
- Meta-analysis of bonding effectiveness to zirconia ceramics.J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 329-334
- Adhesion to zirconia used for dental restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Adhes Dent. 2015; 17: 7-26
- Sandblasting and silica coating of a glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic: Volume loss, morphology, and changes in the surface composition.J Prosthet Dent. 1994; 71: 453-461
- Main clinical outcomes of feldspathic porcelain and glass-ceramic laminate veneers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and complication rates.Int J Prosthodont. 2016; 29: 38-49
- Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues: forces developing in composite materials during hardening.J Am Dent Assoc. 1983; 106: 475-477
- Relaxation of polymerization contraction stresses by flow on dental composites.J Dent Res. 1984; 63: 146-148
- Effect of luting composite shrinkage and thermal loads on the stress distribution in porcelain laminate veneers.J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81: 335-344
- The competition between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress.J Dent Res. 1984; 63: 1396-1399
- Polymerization shrinkage kinetics of dimethacrylate resin-cements.Dent Mater. 2009; 25: 1058-1066
- Real-time in-depth imaging of gap formation in bulk-fill resin composites.Dent Mater. 2019; 35: 585-596
- Polymerisation shrinkage of luting agents for crown and bridge cementation.Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2008; 16: 39-44
- Non-invasive quantification of resin-dentin interfacial gaps using optical coherence tomography: Validation against confocal microscopy.Dent Mater. 2011; 27: 915-925
- X-ray microcomputed tomography for measuring polymerization shrinkage of polymeric dental composites.Dent Mater. 2008; 24: 228-234
- Volumetric shrinkage and film thickness of cementation materials for veneers: An in vitro 3D microcomputed tomography analysis.J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117: 784-791
- Marginal adaptation and CAD-CAM technology: A systematic review of restorative material and fabrication techniques.J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 119: 545-551
- Analysis of marginal adaptation of porcelain laminate veneers produced by computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing technology: a preliminary in vitro study.Int J Prosthodont. 2018; 31: 346-348
- Comparison of marginal and internal adaptation of heat-pressed and CAD/CAM porcelain laminate veneers and a 2-year follow-up.J Prosthodont. 2019; 28: 504-510
- Effect of preparation design on marginal and internal adaptation of translucent zirconia laminate veneers.Eur J Oral Sci. 2018; 126: 507-511
- 3D quantification of clinical marginal and internal gap of porcelain laminate veneers with minimal and without tooth preparation and 2-year clinical evaluation.Quintessence Int. 2016; 47: 461-472
- Resin composite - State of the art.Dent Mater. 2011; 27: 29-38
- Evaluation of resin composite polymerization by three dimensional micro-CT imaging and nanoindentation.Dent Mater. 2011; 27: 1070-1078
- Effect of sonic resin composite delivery on void formation assessed by micro-computed tomography.Oper Dent. 2018; 43: 144-150
- State of the art of zirconia for dental applications.Dent Mater. 2008; 24: 299-307
- The fit of Procera titanium crowns: An in vitro and clinical study.Acta Odontol Scand. 1993; 51: 129-134
- The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique.Br Dent J. 1971; 131: 107-111
- Influence of ceramic thickness and curing mode on the polymerization shrinkage kinetics of dual-cured resin cements.Dent Mater. 2008; 24: 1141-1147
- Luting of inlays, onlays, and overlays with preheated restorative composite resin does not prevent seating accuracy.Int J Esthet Dent. 2018; 13: 318-332
- Factors involved in the development of polymerization shrinkage stress in resin-composites: A systematic review.Dent Mater. 2005; 21: 962-970
- Effect of TEGDMA/BisGMA ratio on stress development and viscoelastic properties of experimental two-paste composites.J Dent Res. 2003; 82: 824-828
- Tooth deformation patterns in molars after composite restoration.Dent Mater. 2004; 20: 535-542
- Using a chewing simulator for fatigue testing of metal ceramic crowns.J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017; 65: 770-780
- Effect of primer treatment on bonding of resin cements to zirconia ceramic.Dent Mater. 2010; 26: 426-432
Article info
Publication history
Published online: March 20, 2020
Footnotes
Supported in part by a Stanley D. Tylman Research Grant from the American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics and Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of Washington.
Identification
Copyright
© 2020 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
