Literature DB >> 7035652

Polished versus autoglazed porcelain surfaces.

L H Klausner, C B Cartwright, G T Charbeneau.   

Abstract

Four different porcelain polishing sequences were evaluated, and the resulting polished surfaces were compared to an unaltered glazed surface. The sequences included: (1) superfine diamond, Dedeco wheels, and levigated alumina; (2) Shofu porcelain polishing system; (3) superfine diamond, Cratex wheel, Burlew disk, and levigated alumina; and (4) Jelenko porcelain carving and polishing wheels. No statistically significant differences were found for the surface roughness values among the initial glazed samples. Furthermore, no significant differences were found between the final polished surfaces and the initial autoglazed surfaces for any of the four test sequences. Significant differences were found between comparable abrasives among the polishing sequences, as well as between steps within a single polishing sequence. The clinical significance of these differences in regard to gingival health or occlusal abrasion and wear is yet to be determined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7035652     DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(82)90180-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  12 in total

1.  Effect of surface topography on the color of dental porcelain.

Authors:  Il-Jang Kim; Yong-Keun Lee; Bum-Soon Lim; Cheol-We Kim
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.896

2.  An in vitro study to identify a ceramic polishing protocol effecting smoothness superior to glazed surface.

Authors:  Noxy George Manjuran; T Sreelal
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2013-08-22

3.  An in vitro investigation to compare the surface roughness of auto glazed, reglazed and chair side polished surfaces of Ivoclar and Vita feldspathic porcelain.

Authors:  Sumit Sethi; Dilip Kakade; Shantanu Jambhekar; Vinay Jain
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2012-12-14

4.  Evaluation of the surface roughness in dental ceramics submitted to different finishing and polishing methods.

Authors:  Alex C Vieira; Mario C S Oliveira; Emilena M C X Lima; Isabel Rambob; Mariana Leite
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2013-03-08

5.  A comparative study on the effect of polishing systems on the color and surface texture of different porcelain systems - feldspathic, pressable, and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing.

Authors:  Preeti Kalia; K Chandrasekharan Nair; Deepesh Jaiswal; Chetna Tikmani; Dhrubojyoti Banerjee; Ritwika Bera
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2021 Apr-Jun

6.  Evaluation of efficiency of manual polishing over autoglazed and overglazed porcelain and its effect on plaque accumulation.

Authors:  Satheesh B Haralur
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2012-11-29       Impact factor: 1.904

7.  An In vitro Evaluation to Compare the Surface Roughness of Glazed, Reglazed and Chair Side Polished Surfaces of Dental Porcelain.

Authors:  Varsha Rani; Sanjeev Mittal; Urvashi Sukhija
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2021-06-14

8.  Maxillary cement retained implant supported monolithic zirconia prosthesis in a full mouth rehabilitation: a clinical report.

Authors:  Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh; Perng-Ru Liu; Ruth Aponte-Wesson; Sandra J O'Neal
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2013-05-30       Impact factor: 1.904

9.  Effect of polishing and glazing on the color and spectral distribution of monolithic zirconia.

Authors:  Hee-Kyung Kim; Sung-Hun Kim; Jai-Bong Lee; Jung-Suk Han; In-Sung Yeo
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2013-08-31       Impact factor: 1.904

10.  Effect of two different finishing systems on surface roughness of feldspathic and fluorapatite porcelains in ceramo-metal restorations: Comparative in vitro study.

Authors:  Cherry Anmol; Sumeet Soni
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2014-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.