Statement of problem

The effect of prophylactic polishing pastes on composite resin materials has been extensively investigated, but little is known about their effect on ceramic materials.

Purpose

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of prophylactic polishing pastes on the 2D and 3D roughness, translucency, and gloss of different ceramic materials.

Material and methods

A total of 120 flat specimens (thickness: 2 mm) obtained from computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) blocks of leucite glass-ceramic (Empress CAD), lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (e.max CAD), and zirconia (Zenostar MT) were glazed and sintered. Forty specimens from each material were then divided into 4 groups and polished with Cleanic fine, Nupro fine, or Proxyt fine pastes, leaving the control group untreated. The specimens were polished for 2 minutes with a prophylaxis cup mounted on a handpiece, applying a constant load of 3.9 N at 2000 rpm. Surface roughness was measured by using a contact profilometer and a 3D optical profilometer. The translucency parameter and gloss value were calculated by using a spectrophotometer and a glossmeter. One specimen per group was observed by scanning electron microscopy at ×200 magnification. Differences in means were compared by using 2-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) test (α=.05).

Results

The 2D roughness of Empress was lower than that of e.max (P<.05) and was increased by using Cleanic fine and Nupro fine pastes (P<.05). The translucency parameter values of Empress and Zenostar decreased with the use of Nupro fine paste (P<.05). Zenostar showed the lowest translucency (P<.05). The effect of prophylactic polishing pastes on gloss was minimal (P>.05). The gloss of Empress was higher than that of Zenostar and e.max (P<.05). The Pearson correlation showed that gloss and surface roughness were correlated (P<.001).

Conclusions

Polishing procedures can alter the surface of a ceramic restoration.

中文翻译：

---

不同预防性糊剂抛光后陶瓷材料的体外2D和3D粗糙度以及分光光度和光泽度分析

问题陈述

预防性抛光膏对复合树脂材料的影响已得到广泛研究，但对它们对陶瓷材料的影响知之甚少。

目的

这项体外研究的目的是评估预防性抛光膏对不同陶瓷材料的2D和3D粗糙度，半透明性和光泽度的影响。

材料与方法

通过计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造（CAD-CAM）的白云玻璃陶瓷（Empress CAD），二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷（e.max CAD）和将氧化锆（Zenostar MT）上釉并烧结。然后将每种材料的40个样品分成4组，并用Cleanic细粉，Nupro细粉或Proxyt细膏进行抛光，而对照组则未经处理。用安装在机头上的预防杯将样品抛光2分钟，在2000 rpm下施加3.9 N的恒定载荷。通过使用接触轮廓仪和3D光学轮廓仪来测量表面粗糙度。通过使用分光光度计和光泽计来计算半透明参数和光泽度值。通过扫描电子显微镜以×200放大倍率观察到每组一个标本。比较均数差异的方法是使用2通ANOVA，然后进行Tukey诚实显着差异（HSD）检验（α= .05）。

结果

Empress的2D粗糙度低于e.max的2D粗糙度（P <.05），并且通过使用Cleanic细浆和Nupro细浆糊可以提高2D粗糙度（P <.05）。Empress和Zenostar的半透明参数值随着使用Nupro细膏而降低（P <.05）。Zenostar的透明度最低（P <.05）。预防性抛光膏对光泽的影响极小（P > .05）。Empress的光泽度高于Zenostar和e.max（P <.05）。皮尔逊相关性表明，光泽度和表面粗糙度相关（P <.001）。

结论

抛光程序可能会改变陶瓷修复体的表面。