| Literature DB >> 35643724 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND The study aimed to assess effect of smokeless tobacco (ST) immersion with thermocycling (TC) on color of Vita Classical shade-guide, surface roughness (Ra) and roughness depth (Rz), and compressive fracture force (CFF) of hybrid polymer-infiltrated-feldspathic ceramic (Vita Enamic), leucite-Feldspathic glass (Vitablocs® Mark II), and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Vita Suprinity) CAD/CAM prosthetic ceramic materials. MATERIAL AND METHODS A 48 samples were milled from Vita Enamic, Vita mark II, and Vita Suprinity. VitaPan shade-guide, Ra, and Rz were registered before ST immersion. Then, the same parameters were recorded again after 15 days of ST staining with and without TC. CFFs and fracture modes of samples after 3 months of aging were documented. RESULTS A slight change was observed in VitaPan shade-guide. Ra and Rz of Vita Suprinity (VS) recorded the highest values among ceramic groups at 3 time intervals. Increases in Ra and Rz were observed after immersion and staining with TC. ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc tests were used. Significant differences among and between groups were noticed only before immersion in ST and TC, with P value ³0.00. The highest mean value and SD of CFFs (MPa and Newton) were recorded in Vita Suprinity, followed by Vita Enamic (VE) and Vita mark II (VMII). Reparable fracture was higher in VMII and VS. CONCLUSIONS ST staining and TC caused color changes in VitaPan shade-guide and increases in Ra and Rz of tested materials, with highest and lowest values recorded in VS and VE. CFFs were marginally equal to clinically accepted values for VS and equal or slightly higher than the half values for VE and VMII groups.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35643724 PMCID: PMC9161701 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.936885
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1Flowchart showing the study design.
Figure 2Vita Classic shade color before and after immersion.
Mean and SD values of Ra and Rz of the used ceramics.
| Parameter | Type of ceramic | Mean and SD |
|---|---|---|
| Ra before immersion and TC | Vita Enamic | 0.21 (0.037) |
| Vita Mark II | 0.33 (0.019) | |
| Vita Suprinity | 0.37 (0.032) | |
| Ra after immersion without TC | Vita Enamic | 0.10 (0.105) |
| Vita Mark II | 0.15 (0.174) | |
| Vita Suprinity | 0.19 (0.179) | |
| Ra after immersion with TC | Vita Enamic | 0.15 (0.151) |
| Vita Mark II | 0.18 (0.190) | |
| Vita Suprinity | 0.22 (0.230) | |
| Rz before immersion & TC | Vita Enamic | 0.25 (0.029) |
| Vita Mark II | 0.36 (0.029) | |
| Vita Suprinity | 0.42 (0.045) | |
| Rz after immersion without TC | Vita Enamic | 0.11 (0.115) |
| Vita Mark II | 0.19 (0.190) | |
| Vita Suprinity | 0.23 (0.236) | |
| Rz after immersion & with TC | Vita Enamic | 0.16 (0.016) |
| Vita Mark II | 0.20 (0.203) | |
| Vita Suprinity | 0.29 (0.029) |
ANOVA test values for Ra and Rz of the used prosthetic materials.
| Parameter | Sum of squares | df | Mean square | F | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Ra before immersion & TC | Between groups | 0.208 | 2 | 0.104 | 112.321 |
|
| Within groups | 0.042 | 45 | 0.001 | |||
|
| 0.250 | 47 | ||||
| Ra after immersion without TC | Between groups | 0.55 | 2 |
|
|
|
| Within groups |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
| ||||
| Ra after immersion & with TC | Between groups |
|
|
|
|
|
| Within groups |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| ||||||
| Rz before immersion & TC | Between groups |
|
|
|
|
|
| Within groups |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
| ||||
| Rz after immersion without TC | Between groups |
|
|
|
|
|
| Within groups |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
| ||||
| Rz after immersion & with TC | Between groups |
|
|
|
|
|
| Within groups |
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
Post hoc (Bonferroni) multi-comparison tests.
| Type of ceramic | Vita Enamic | Vita Mark II | Vita Suprinity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Ra before immersion and TC | Vita Enamic | – |
|
|
| Vita Mark II |
| – |
| |
| Vita Suprinity |
|
| – | |
| Ra after immersion without TC | Vita Enamic |
| ||
| Vita Mark II | ||||
| Vita Suprinity | ||||
| Ra after immersion with TC | Vita Enamic |
| ||
| Vita Mark II | ||||
| Vita Suprinity | ||||
|
| ||||
| Rz before immersion & TC | Vita Enamic | – |
|
|
| Vita Mark II |
| – |
| |
| Vita Suprinity |
|
| – | |
| Rz after immersion without TC | Vita Enamic |
| ||
| Vita Mark II | ||||
| Vita Suprinity | ||||
| Rz after immersion & with TC | Vita Enamic |
| ||
| Vita Mark II | ||||
| Vita Suprinity | ||||
Mean and SD values of CFFs by ANOVA followed by Bonferroni test of the ceramics used.
| Parameter | Type of ceramic | Mean and SD | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Compressive forces (MPa) | Vita Enamic | 60.69 (2.999)A,B |
|
| Vita Mark II | 36.91 (1.429)A,B | ||
| Vita Suprinity | 103.59 (2.875)A,B | ||
| Compressive forces (Newton) | Vita Enamic | 476.66 (49.237)A,B |
|
| Vita Mark II | 290.59 (46.234)A,B | ||
| Vita Suprinity | 832.17 (96.477)A,B |
Different superscript letters indicate statistically significant difference withing the respective subgroup (p<0.05) based on ANOVA followed by Bonferroni tests.
Figure 3Values of compressive fracture forces in MPa and Newtons.
Figure 4Percentage of fracture mode.