Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 27, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin: an in vitro study
Jeerapa Sripetchdanond1, Chalermpol Leevailoj2
1Graduate student, Esthetic Restorative and Implant Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Statement Of Problem:
Demand is increasing for ceramic and composite resin posterior restorations. However, ceramics are recognized for their high abrasiveness to opposing dental structure.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to investigate the wear of enamel as opposed to dental ceramics and composite resin.
Material And Methods:
Twenty-four test specimens (antagonists), 6 each of monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, composite resin, and enamel, were prepared into cylindrical rods. Enamel specimens were prepared from 24 extracted human permanent molar teeth. Enamel specimens were abraded against each type of antagonist with a pin-on-disk wear tester under a constant load of 25 N at 20 rpm for 4800 cycles. The maximum depth of wear (Dmax), mean depth of wear (Da), and mean surface roughness (Ra) of the enamel specimens were measured with a profilometer. All data were statistically analyzed by 1-way ANOVA, followed by the Tukey test (α=.05). A paired t test was used to compare the Ra of enamel at baseline and after testing. The wear of both the enamel and antagonists was evaluated qualitatively with scanning electron microscopic images.
Results:
No significant differences were found in enamel wear depth (Dmax, Da) between monolithic zirconia (2.17 ±0.80, 1.83 ±0.75 μm) and composite resin (1.70 ±0.92, 1.37 ±0.81 μm) or between glass ceramic (8.54 ±2.31, 7.32 ±2.06 μm) and enamel (10.72 ±6.31, 8.81 ±5.16 μm). Significant differences were found when the enamel wear depth caused by monolithic zirconia and composite resin was compared with that of glass ceramic and enamel (P<.001). The Ra of enamel specimens increased significantly after wear tests with monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and enamel (P<.05); however, no difference was found among these materials.
Conclusions:
Within the limitations of this in vitro study, monolithic zirconia and composite resin resulted in less wear depth to human enamel compared with glass ceramic and enamel. All test materials except composite resin similarly increased the enamel surface roughness after wear testing.
More Related Videos
08:29Multi-material Ceramic-Based Components – Additive Manufacturing of Black-and-white Zirconia Components by Thermoplastic 3D-Printing (CerAM - T3DP)
Published on: January 7, 2019
08:45Shrinkage of Dental Composite in Simulated Cavity Measured with Digital Image Correlation
Published on: July 21, 2014
Related Concept Videos
01:19Veneer
Other veneering techniques include plain-slicing, quarter-slicing, and rift-slicing. These...
01:21Tooth Anatomy
The Crown, Neck, and Root
The visible part of the tooth is referred to as the crown. It's covered by enamel, the hardest substance in the human body. The crown is uniquely shaped for each type of tooth, allowing for different functions such as cutting, tearing, or...