Gaoqi Wang1, Song Zhang2, Cuirong Bian3, Hui Kong3. 1. Key Laboratory of High Efficiency and Clean Mechanical Manufacture (Ministry of Education), School of Mechanical Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, PR China. 2. Key Laboratory of High Efficiency and Clean Mechanical Manufacture (Ministry of Education), School of Mechanical Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, PR China. Electronic address: zhangsong@sdu.edu.cn. 3. Department of Prosthodontics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, PR China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the airborne-particle abrasion and liner application on the interfacial toughness between veneering porcelain and zirconia core by means of a fracture mechanics test. METHODS: Beam-shaped zirconia specimens were sectioned and divided into 4 groups according to different surface treatments as follows: Group C (control): no treatment; Group L: application of liner; Group A: airborne-particle abrasion with Al2O3 (sandblasting); and Group AL: airborne-particle abrasion and application of liner. The zirconia surfaces before and after sandblasting were observed and analyzed by SEM and white light interferometer. Specimens of each pretreated group were veneered with 3 core/veneer thickness ratios of 2:3, 1:1, and 3:2, corresponding to 3 phase angles respectively. Fracture mechanics test was performed on each specimen, the energy release rate G and phase angle ψ were calculated to characterize interfacial toughness. The experimental data were analyzed statistically using three-way ANOVA and the Tukey's HSD test. The surfaces of fractured specimens were examined by SEM and EDX. RESULTS: At each phase angle, the interfaces with no treatment had higher mean G values than that of other groups. All the specimens showed mixed failure mode with residual veneer or liner on the zirconia surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: The toughness of zirconia/veneer interface with no treatment is significantly higher than that of interfaces subjected to liner application and airborne-particle abrasion. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Liner application and airborne-particle abrasion seem to reduce zirconia/veneer interfacial toughness. Therefore, the two surface treatment methods should be applied with caution.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the airborne-particle abrasion and liner application on the interfacial toughness between veneering porcelain and zirconia core by means of a fracture mechanics test. METHODS: Beam-shaped zirconia specimens were sectioned and divided into 4 groups according to different surface treatments as follows: Group C (control): no treatment; Group L: application of liner; Group A: airborne-particle abrasion with Al2O3 (sandblasting); and Group AL: airborne-particle abrasion and application of liner. The zirconia surfaces before and after sandblasting were observed and analyzed by SEM and white light interferometer. Specimens of each pretreated group were veneered with 3 core/veneer thickness ratios of 2:3, 1:1, and 3:2, corresponding to 3 phase angles respectively. Fracture mechanics test was performed on each specimen, the energy release rate G and phase angle ψ were calculated to characterize interfacial toughness. The experimental data were analyzed statistically using three-way ANOVA and the Tukey's HSD test. The surfaces of fractured specimens were examined by SEM and EDX. RESULTS: At each phase angle, the interfaces with no treatment had higher mean G values than that of other groups. All the specimens showed mixed failure mode with residual veneer or liner on the zirconia surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: The toughness of zirconia/veneer interface with no treatment is significantly higher than that of interfaces subjected to liner application and airborne-particle abrasion. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Liner application and airborne-particle abrasion seem to reduce zirconia/veneer interfacial toughness. Therefore, the two surface treatment methods should be applied with caution.