The Surface Roughness of Contemporary Indirect CAD/CAM Restorative Materials That Are Glazed and Chair-Side-Finished/Polished

• Published in: Materials 2024-02, Vol.17 (5), p.997
• Main Authors: Albani, Ragad, Habib, Syed Rashid, AlQahtani, Abdulaziz, AlHelal, Abdulaziz A, Alrabiah, Mohammed, Anwar, Saqib
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; CAD; CAD-CAM systems; CAD-CAM systems industry; CAD/CAM; CAM; Ceramic materials; Ceramics; Computer aided design; Computer aided manufacturing; Computer programs; Design; Electron microscopes; Ethics; Glazing; Heat resistance; Manufacturers; Mechanical properties; Prostheses; Software; Surface roughness; Topography; Zirconium dioxide; Zirconium oxide
• ISSN: 1996-1944; 1996-1944
• DOI: 10.3390/ma17050997

The surface roughness (Ra) of indirect computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)-fabricated dental restorations is crucial for their long-term durability. This study intended to evaluate the Ra of five different types of contemporary indirect CAD/CAM restorative materials with varying compositions that were glazed and finished/polished. A total of 75 specimens, disc-shaped (10 mm × 2 mm), were obtained from five materials ( = 15) (Tetric CAD, IPS e.max CAD, IPS e.max ZirCAD, CELTRA Duo, and Vita Enamic) and fabricated by CAD/CAM. One of the two surfaces for each specimen was subjected to glazing, while the other surface was subjected to finishing/polishing. The Ra of the two surfaces in micrometers (μm) was evaluated using a Profilometer, while the surface topography was examined using a scanning electron microscope. Using SPSS, the Kruskal-Wallis, post hoc Conover, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to statistically evaluate the data. A comparison of the Ra for the finished/polished surfaces of the five test materials showed significant differences ( < 0.0001). Among the finished/polished surfaces, the mean rank values of Vita Enamic were significantly higher than the other four test materials ( < 0.0001). A comparison of the Ra of glazed surfaces among the five study materials revealed significant differences ( < 0.0001). The Ra for the IPS e.max ZirCAD material was significantly higher than the rest of the four materials ( < 0.001). A comparison of the Ra for two types of surface conditioning within each of the five test materials showed a significant difference ( < 0.05). Only for IPS e.max ZirCAD was the Ra of the glazed surface significantly higher than the finished/polished surface ( < 0.0001). Significant variations in the surface roughness (Ra) were exhibited between the finished/polished and glazed surfaces of the five test materials. Hybrid ceramics showed the highest Ra values for the finished/polished surfaces, and zirconia exhibited the highest Ra values among the glazed surfaces among the tested materials. The Ra values of either finished/polished or glazed surfaces of the test materials were within the clinically acceptable range (0.2-0.5 μm), except for the glazed surface of the zirconia ceramics (0.84 μm).