Enamel wear caused by monolithic zirconia crowns following one year of clinical use

Presenter Information

Genc Zenunaj

Session

Dental Sciences

Description

Aims: To compare the amount of tooth wear induced by monolithic zirconia crown restorations placed in posterior region with natural tooth wear on the contralateral side.

Methods: Fifty-one (51) patients in need for single crown restoration were included in this study. Crown preparation was performed according to clinically indicated guidelines and definitive crown impressions were obtained using PVS material. Gypsum master cast models were fabricated and single crown dies were sectioned. Crowns were milled using a CAD-CAM procedure from monolithic zirconia blocks, Prettau Anterior Multistratum (ZirconZahn, South Tirol, Italy) by the ZirconZahn method. The crowns were cemented and adapted intraorally. An impression was obtained immediately following crown insertion of both dental arches. Following one year of functional loading, the patients were recalled to obtain a second impression using the same procedure. The casts models were then optically scanned using a lab scanner (ZirconZahn S600 Arti scanner) and the resulting 3D surfaces were exported in STL file format and imported into CloudCompare reverse engineering software for analysis. The zirconia crown antagonists as well the contralateral tooth antagonists for all 46 cases were segmented and tooth wear was assessed as the negative space (wear surface difference) between the two surfaces. The root mean square (RMS) surface difference in millimetre between the two impressions was quantified. The resulting tooth wear was quantified in an excel sheet and saved for statistical analysis.

Results:

Forty-six (46) patients presented for recall with four (5) dropouts. SPSS statistical analysis software was used for analysis. Mean tooth wear of the zirconia crown antagonist was 12µm (twelve microne) and in contralateral was 11µm (eleven microne. Mean wear of zirconia monolithis crown itself was 9 µm (nine microne) and contralateral tooth to crown was 9 (nine microne) µm following one year of functional loading and the differences were statistically significant at P=0.48. No crowns were lost, chipped or decemented at the follow up visit.

Conclusions: Within the limitations and the short follow up period of this study, it can be concluded that tooth wear induced by monolithic zirconia restoration did not different from naturally induced wear on the contralateral side. More research is required to corroborate the results of the current investigation.

Keywords:

tooth wear, monolithic zirconia, dentistry, lab scanner, three-dimensional models

Proceedings Editor

Edmond Hajrizi

ISBN

978-9951-550-50-5

Location

UBT Kampus, Lipjan

Start Date

29-10-2022 12:00 AM

End Date

30-10-2022 12:00 AM

DOI

10.33107/ubt-ic.2022.217

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Oct 29th, 12:00 AM Oct 30th, 12:00 AM

Enamel wear caused by monolithic zirconia crowns following one year of clinical use

UBT Kampus, Lipjan

Aims: To compare the amount of tooth wear induced by monolithic zirconia crown restorations placed in posterior region with natural tooth wear on the contralateral side.

Methods: Fifty-one (51) patients in need for single crown restoration were included in this study. Crown preparation was performed according to clinically indicated guidelines and definitive crown impressions were obtained using PVS material. Gypsum master cast models were fabricated and single crown dies were sectioned. Crowns were milled using a CAD-CAM procedure from monolithic zirconia blocks, Prettau Anterior Multistratum (ZirconZahn, South Tirol, Italy) by the ZirconZahn method. The crowns were cemented and adapted intraorally. An impression was obtained immediately following crown insertion of both dental arches. Following one year of functional loading, the patients were recalled to obtain a second impression using the same procedure. The casts models were then optically scanned using a lab scanner (ZirconZahn S600 Arti scanner) and the resulting 3D surfaces were exported in STL file format and imported into CloudCompare reverse engineering software for analysis. The zirconia crown antagonists as well the contralateral tooth antagonists for all 46 cases were segmented and tooth wear was assessed as the negative space (wear surface difference) between the two surfaces. The root mean square (RMS) surface difference in millimetre between the two impressions was quantified. The resulting tooth wear was quantified in an excel sheet and saved for statistical analysis.

Results:

Forty-six (46) patients presented for recall with four (5) dropouts. SPSS statistical analysis software was used for analysis. Mean tooth wear of the zirconia crown antagonist was 12µm (twelve microne) and in contralateral was 11µm (eleven microne. Mean wear of zirconia monolithis crown itself was 9 µm (nine microne) and contralateral tooth to crown was 9 (nine microne) µm following one year of functional loading and the differences were statistically significant at P=0.48. No crowns were lost, chipped or decemented at the follow up visit.

Conclusions: Within the limitations and the short follow up period of this study, it can be concluded that tooth wear induced by monolithic zirconia restoration did not different from naturally induced wear on the contralateral side. More research is required to corroborate the results of the current investigation.