Influência de diferentes técnicas de acabamento e polimento na resistência à flexão de zirconia ultratranslucida após envelhecimento in situ
Introduction: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different protocols of finishing and polishing, thickness, and aging in situ on flexural strength and cell adhesion of ultratranslucent zirconia. Methodology: 240 zirconia bars (UT: Prettau Anterior/Ultratranslucent, zirkonza...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | Dissertação |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Brasil
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/27720 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | Introduction: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different protocols of
finishing and polishing, thickness, and aging in situ on flexural strength and cell adhesion of
ultratranslucent zirconia. Methodology: 240 zirconia bars (UT: Prettau
Anterior/Ultratranslucent, zirkonzahn, Gais, Italy) were cut, polished and sintered, presenting
final dimensions of 1,0 x 2 x 8mm, and 0,5 x 2 x 8mm. The bars were divided among 16 groups
(n=15) in accordance to three factors “in situ aging”– 2 levels (With and Withouth “E”),
“thickness” – 2 levels (1- 1 mm or 05- 0,5mm) and “Finishing and Polishing” – 4 levels (CControl, B- Rubber polishing; P- grinding with burs; PB- grinding with burs + polishing). To
the experimental groups submitted to in situ aging, 15 patients were selected (ethics commitee
- 3.133.187), the samples were included on the temporary prothesis, and the patients used the
prothesis with the bars during 60 days. The bars were submitted to mini flexure three points test
(1mm/min, load cell 100 kgf). Two samples of each group were prepared to the topographical
analysis on Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), X-ray Diffraction (XRD), Atomic Force
Microscopy (AFM), and surface roughness. For the cell adhesion assay, six blocks of
ultratranslucent zirconia (2.5 x 2.5 mm), of each group were contaminated with the C. albicans
(ATCC 90028) for counting the colony forming units (CFU / mL). Results: The mechanical
test results were analyzed using ANOVA (3 factors) and Tukey (5%); and the cell adhesion
assay data by the Kruskal Wallis test (5%. Results: ANOVA (3 factors) revealed that only the
"Finishing and Polishing" factor was statistically significant for mini-flexure strength (p =
0.0001). The finishing and polishing with rubber polishers produced mini-flexure resistance
values (varying from 257,1 to 292,9 Mpa) statistically lower in relation to the groups polished
only with rubber discs (varying from 449,8 to 513,5 Mpa) to all experimental conditions.
Concerning to cell adhesion, Kruskal wallis test did not reveal any significant differences
between the experimental groups (p=0,053), despite of the fact that, the surface roughness
presented itself statistically significant through ANOVA (p = 0,001) and difference between all
groups. Conclusion: The adjustment of ultratranslucent zirconia monolithic should preferably
be performed with rubber polishers impregnated with polyurethan. Concerning to cell adhesion,
the protocols of finishing and polishing do not interfer at fungal adhesion, only on surface
roughness, when the samples are polished with the smoothest rubbers. |
|---|