Influence of glazing and aging on the marginal, axial, axio-occlusal, and occlusal fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated using additive and subtractive techniques

 

Published:February 10, 2024DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.01.010

ABSTRACT

Statement of problem

Studies are sparse on how glazing and aging influence the fit of additively fabricated monolithic zirconia restorations.

Purpose

The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the effect of glazing and aging on the fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated using different techniques.

Material and methods

A total of 32 monolithic zirconia restorations were fabricated for a typodont model by using 4 distinct techniques (subtractive fabrication [SF], stereolithography [SLA], digital light processing [DLP], and lithography-based ceramic manufacturing [LCM]). The silicone replica approach was adopted to measure the discrepancy values for premolar and molar abutments after sintering, glazing, and 1 year of aging. The silicone replicas were sliced into mesiodistal and buccopalatal cross-sections, and digital micrographs of the cross-sections were made with a ×80 stereomicroscope. An inherent measuring program was run to record the discrepancy values (µm). Repeated-measures 2-way ANOVAs with the Bonferroni post hoc test were used to statistically analyze the acquired data. (α=.05).

Results

From the repeated measures 2-way ANOVAs, both the glazing×fabrication technique and the aging×fabrication technique interactions were not statistically significant (P>.05). Glazing significantly influenced premolar abutment marginal (P=.022) and occlusal (P=.007) discrepancy values, as well as molar abutment marginal discrepancy values (P=.047). Aging had a statistically significant effect on premolar abutment marginal (P=.008) and occlusal (P=.011) discrepancy values, as well as molar abutment occlusal discrepancy values (P=.039). In both the glazing and aging data, for all areas of interest, statistically significant differences were detected among the fabrication techniques (P<.05). The LCM group had the lowest discrepancy values, followed by the SLA, SF, and DLP groups.

Conclusions

The LCM and SLA groups outperformed the other groups in terms of fit accuracy. The glazing and aging procedures altered the discrepancy values. The marginal discrepancy values of all groups were below the threshold of clinical acceptability (<120 µm).