Publication: Effect of Zirconia Thickness, Cement Color, and Titanium Implant Abutment Surface Treatment Type on the Esthetic Outcomes of High-Translucency Monolithic Zirconia
0
0
Issued Date
2024-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
08822786
eISSN
19424434
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85206597739
Pubmed ID
38349847
Journal Title
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants
Volume
39
Issue
5
Start Page
765
End Page
775
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants Vol.39 No.5 (2024) , 765-775
Suggested Citation
Sirawuttipong C., Palanuwech M. Effect of Zirconia Thickness, Cement Color, and Titanium Implant Abutment Surface Treatment Type on the Esthetic Outcomes of High-Translucency Monolithic Zirconia. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants Vol.39 No.5 (2024) , 765-775. 775. doi:10.11607/jomi.10672 Retrieved from: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14740/20937
Author(s)
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the esthetic outcomes based on the color differences in zirconia (Zr) of varying thickness, resin cement color, and types of titanium (Ti) implant surface treatments. Materials and Methods: Overall, 28 high-translucency monolithic zirconia (HTMZ) specimens were arranged into four groups based on Zr thickness: 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mm (n = 7 per thickness). Each group was tested using two resin cement colors (clear and opaque) in combination with six surface-treated Ti groups (n = 7), including untreated titanium (UT), anodization (AN), 50-μm alumina airborne-particle abrasion followed by AN (SBAN), AN followed by 50-μm alumina airborne-particle abrasion (ANSB), 9.5% hydrofluoric acid followed by AN (HFAN), and AN followed by 9.5% hydrofluoric acid (ANHF). This created a total of 48 experimental groups, including the use of composite resin (n = 7, shade A2D) for four control groups. All specimens were measured using a spectrophotometer and subsequently compared with composite resin (control) with the corresponding Zr thickness to establish color differences. A color difference of < 2.7 was considered clinically acceptable. The data obtained were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and post hoc test (P =.05). Results: Zr thickness, resin cement color, and type of Ti implant surface treatment significantly affected the observed color differences (P <.05). When using 2.5-mm HTMZ with clear resin cement on AN, UT, SBAN, HFAN, and ANSB, the mean color differences were below the clinically acceptable values, and the 95% CIs of color differences were below the clinically acceptable values for AN, UT, and SBAN groups. Conclusions: HTMZ with a minimum thickness of 2.5 mm and clear resin cement on AN, UT, and SBAN groups potentially result in acceptable color matching with 95% CIs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2024;39:765–775. doi: 10.11607/jomi.10672