A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Do surface treatments affect the optical properties of ceramic veneers? | LitMetric

Do surface treatments affect the optical properties of ceramic veneers?

J Prosthet Dent

Research Assistant, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.

Published: September 2014

Statement Of Problem: Surface treatments may affect the optical properties of ceramic veneers before cementation.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether various surface treatments affect the optical properties of different types of ceramic veneers.

Material And Methods: Disk-shaped ceramic veneers (N=280) were prepared from the IPS e.max Press, e.max CAD, Empress Esthetic, e.max Ceram, and Inline ceramic systems with 0.5-mm and 1.0-mm thicknesses. The ceramics were divided into 4 groups: no surface treatments; etched with hydrofluoric acid; airborne-particle abraded with 30-μm Al2O3; and irradiated with erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser. A translucent shade of resin was chosen for cementation. Color parameters were examined with a colorimeter. Statistical analyses were done with 3-way ANOVA and the Bonferroni test (P=.05).

Results: Significant interactions were noted between the surface treatments, ceramic type, and thickness for ΔE values (P=.01), and no significant interactions were noted for L* (P=.773), a* (P=.984), and b* (P=.998). The greatest color change occurred after airborne-particle abrasion with 0.5-mm-thick e.max Press (2.9 ΔE). Significant differences in ΔE values were found among the hydrofluoric acid, airborne-particle abrasion, and laser groups for 0.5-mm-thick ceramics, except IPS Inline, and among the hydrofluoric acid, airborne-particle abrasion, and laser groups for 1.0-mm-thick ceramics, except Empress Esthetic ceramics.

Conclusions: The color change of the ceramics increased after the surface treatments, particularly as the ceramics became thinner.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.001DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

surface treatments
24
treatments affect
12
affect optical
12
optical properties
12
hydrofluoric acid
12
acid airborne-particle
12
airborne-particle abrasion
12
properties ceramic
8
ceramic veneers
8
emax press
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!