Investigation of human enamel wear against four dental ceramics and gold
Investigation of human enamel wear against four dental ceramics and gold
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0300-5712(97)00041-9
复制
发表时间：
1998-07-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Gilmour, WH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Al-Hiyasat, AS;Saunders, WP;Gilmour, WH
目标.这项体外研究比较了釉质对铝瓷、粘结瓷、低熔热液陶瓷、镶嵌石可切削陶瓷和铸金的磨损。50对牙齿材料试样在牙科磨损机中进行测试，在标准载荷（40 N）、速率（80个循环/min（-1））和在蒸馏水中25 000个循环下。通过测量牙体高度损失和修复材料磨痕深度来确定磨损量。各组间釉质和材料的磨损差异有统计学意义（p < 0.001）。随访比较（95%CI显著性水平）表明，金引起的牙釉质磨损显着低于所有陶瓷测试。铝瓷和粘结瓷组的釉质磨损量明显高于水热和可切削陶瓷组。有没有显着差异的釉质磨损量之间产生的铝质和粘结瓷，也没有之间产生的水热和可切削陶瓷。此外，氧化铝陶瓷和粘结陶瓷的磨损明显大于水热陶瓷、可切削陶瓷和金。铝瓷与粘结瓷、水热陶瓷与可切削陶瓷、可切削陶瓷与金之间的磨损无显著差异。然而，水热陶瓷的磨损明显大于金。得出的结论是，水热和可切削陶瓷是显着较少的磨料和更耐磨损比传统的铝和粘结瓷。金是磨蚀性最小且最耐磨的材料，尽管可加工陶瓷和金之间的磨损差异在统计学上并不显着。(C)1998爱思唯尔科技有限公司版权所有。
Objectives. This in vitro study compared the wear of enamel against aluminous porcelain, bonded porcelain, low fusing hydrothermal ceramic, feldspathic machinable ceramic, and cast gold.Methods. Fifty pairs of tooth-material specimens were tested in a dental wear machine, under a standard load (40 N), rate (80 cycles min(-1)) and for 25 000 cycles in distilled water. The amount of wear was determined by measuring the height loss of the tooth, and the depth of wear track of the restorative materials.Results. There was a significant difference in wear among the groups for both enamel and materials (p < 0.001). Follow-up comparisons (95% CI significance level) showed that gold caused significantly less enamel wear than all ceramics tested. The amount of enamel wear in the aluminous and bonded porcelain groups was significantly higher than with the hydrothermal and machinable ceramic groups. There was no significant difference between the amount of enamel wear produced by the aluminous and bonded porcelains nor between that produced by the hydrothermal and machinable ceramics. Furthermore, the wear of the aluminous and bonded porcelains was significantly greater than that of the hydrothermal ceramic, the machinable ceramic and gold. No significant difference in wear was found between aluminous and bonded porcelains, hydrothermal and machinable ceramics, or between machinable ceramic and gold. However, the hydrothermal ceramic had significantly greater wear than gold.Conclusions. It was concluded that the hydrothermal and the machinable ceramics were significantly less abrasive and more resistant to wear than the conventional aluminous and bonded porcelains. Gold was the least abrasive material and most resistant to wear, although the difference in wear between the machinable ceramic and gold was not statistically significant. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.