COMPARISON OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF AUTO GLAZED, REGLAZED AND CHAIR SIDE POLISHED SURFACE OF THREE TYPES OF FELDSPATHIC PORCELAIN- AN IN-VITRO STUDY

Dr. Mansi Kalra, Dr. Veena Gowri Shah, Dr. Shriprasad Sarapur, Dr. Amrita Pandita, Dr. Jitendra Khetan

Abstract


Objectives

To evaluate and compare the average surface roughness of an auto glazed, reglazed and chair side polished surface of three commercial brands of feldspathic porcelain.

Materials and method

Three feldspathic porcelain, namely VITA VMK94 (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Sachingen, Germany), Ceramco3 (DETSPLY International Inc. Germany) and SHOFU VINTAGE Halo (SHOFU INC. Kyoto Japan) were selected to fabricate 30 specimens each. A medium-grit diamond rotary cutting instrument was used to remove the glaze layer, and then 10 specimens from each group were randomly selected and re-glazed and similarly 10 specimens from each group were polished using a well-defined sequence of polishing comprising of: Shofu porcelain polishing system, White gloss disc/polishing wheel and finally with small buff wheel with pumice slurry.

Results

The surface roughness of the specimens (Ra values) were measured using surface profiler and values were The results show that there is no statistically significant difference between the surface roughness of reglazed and chair-side polished surface. In addition, both reglazed and chair-side polished surfaces are better than the auto glazed surface.

Conclusion

Polishing an adjusted porcelain surface with the suggested sequence of polishing will lead to a finish similar to a re-glazed surface. Therefore chair-side polishing can be a good alternative to reglazing for finishing adjusted porcelain surface.


Keywords


Autoglaze; reglaze; chair side polishing; porcelain

Full Text:

PDF

References


. Jagger DC, Harrison A. An in vitro investigation into the wear effects of un-glazed, glazed, and polished porcelain on human enamel. J Prosthet Dent 1994; 72:320–323.

. Klausner LH, Cartwright CB, Charbeneau GT. Polished versus auto glazed porcelain surfaces. J Prosthet Dent 1982; 47:157–162.

. Zalkind M, Lauer S, Stern N. Porcelain surface texture after reduction and natural glazing. J Prosthet Dent 1986; 55:30–33.

. Patterson JW, McLundie AC, Stirrups DR, Taylor WG. Refinishing of porcelain by using a refinishing kit. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 65:383–388.

. Sethi S, Kakade D, Jambhekar S, Jain V. An in vitro investigation to compare the surface roughness of auto glazed, reglazed and chair side polished surfaces of Ivoclar and Vita feldspathic porcelain J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2012;13(4):478–485.

. Wright MD et al. Comparison of three systems for the polishing of an ultra-low fusing dental porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92:486–490.

. Sulik WD, Plekavich EJ. Surface finishing of dental porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 1981; 46:217–221.

. Owen S, Reaney D and Newsome P. Finishing and polishing porcelain surfaces chair side. International Dentistry- Australasian Edition 2016:06(4):68-73

. Rosenstiel SF, Baiker MA, Johnston WM. A comparison of glazed and polished dental porcelain. Int J Prosthodont 1989; 2:524-9.

. Olivera AB, Marques MM. The effect of glazed and polished ceramic on human enamel wear. Int J Prosthodont 2006; 19:547–548.

. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Yuzbasioglu E, Bal S. The effects of porcelain polishing systems on the color and surface texture of feldspathic porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96:122–128.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.