Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Monolithic Zirconia after Using Different Polishing Kits

Madson Barros Bandeira, Igor Menezes Silva Queiroz, Amilcar Freitas Junior, Mutlu Ozcan, Antonio Eduardo Martinelli, José Renato Cavalcanti Queiroz


Objective: To evaluate the effect of different kits to polish monolithic zirconia on its surface roughness. Material and Methods: Five samples were fabricated using zirconia blocks. Each sintered block was divided into four areas of equal size and each area was subjected to a specific surface treatment according to the four groups of the study: GC: no surface treatment, GG: unidirectional grinding with high speed tapered bur under refrigeration, GP1: wear similar to GG followed by polishing with zirconia polishing kit Kenda at the same wear direction, and GP2: wear similar to GG followed by polishing with zirconia polishing kit Diacera at the same wear direction. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of ceramic topography and roughness were performed using a digital optical profilometer, and Roughness measurements were performed using two parameters (Ra and Rz: arithmetical mean of the absolute values of the surface departures and of the five highest peaks and valleys, respectively). Scanning electron micrographs of each ceramic surface were obtained to illustrate sample roughness. The means of each group were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test. Results: Morphological analysis showed that polishing kits provided the same pattern of a smooth surface. To statistical analysis, this study showed that different polishing kits influenced zirconia roughness for both Ra and Rz after surface wear (p < 0.05) with both situations improved the surface roughness observed immediately after zirconia sintering. Conclusion: According to the results, both polish kits resulted in a surface texture within acceptable clinical parameters.


Dental Materials; Ceramics; Dental Polishing.

Full Text:



Las Casas EB, Bastos FS, Godoy GCD, Buono VTL. Enamel wear and surface roughness characterization using 3D profilometry. Tribol Int 2008; 41(12):1232-36. doi: 10.1016/j.triboint.2008.03.008.

Kim MJ, Oh SH, Kim JH, Ju SW, Seo DG, Jun SH, Ahn JS, Ryu JJ. Wear evaluation of the human enamel opposing different Y-TZP dental ceramics and other porcelains. J Dent 2012; 40(11):979-88. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.08.004.

Janyavula S, Lawson N, Cakir D, Beck P, Ramp LC, Burgess JO. The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109(1):22-9. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60005-0.

Mitov G, Heintze SD, Walz S, Woll K, Muecklich F, Pospiech P. Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures. J Dent 2012; 28(8):909-18. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.010.

Elmaria A, Goldstein G, Vijayaraghavan T, Legeros RZ, Hittelman EL. An evaluation of wear enamel is opposed by various ceramic materials and gold. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96(5):345-53. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.09.002.

Sarikaya I, Guler AU. Effects of different surface treatments on the color stability of various dental porcelains. J Dent Sci 2011; 6:65-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2011.03.001.

Lawson NC, Janyavula S, Syklawer S, McLaren EA, Burgess JO. Wear of enamel opposing zirconia and lithium disilicate after adjustment, polishing and glazing. J Dent 2014; 42(12):1586-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.09.008.

Belo YD, Sonza QN, Borba M, Bona AD. Yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia: mechanical behavior, adhesion and clinical longevity. Cerâmica 2013; 59(352):633-39. doi: 10.1590/S0366-69132013000400021.

Aksoy G, Polat H, Polat M, Coskun G. Effect of various treatment and glazing (coating) techniques on the roughness and wettability of ceramic dental restorative surfaces. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2006; 53(2):254-59. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2006.09.016.

Ghazal M, Kern M. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 101(5):342-49. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60068-8.

Sripetchdanond J, Leevailoj C. Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112(5):1141-50. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.006.

Sabrah AHA, Cook NB, Luangruangrong P, Hara AT, Bottino MC. Full-contour Y-TZP ceramic surface roughness effect on synthetic hydroxyapatite wear. Dent Mater 2013; 29(6):666-73. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2013.03.008.

Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 2009; 41(4):1149-60. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.

Queiroz JR, Botelho MA, Sousa SA, Martinelli AE, Özcan M. Evaluation of spatial and functional roughness parameters on air-abraded zirconia as a function of particle type and deposition pressure. J Adhes Dent 2015; 17(1):77-80. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a33503.

Waikar RA, Guo YB. A comprehensive characterization of 3D surface topography induced by hard turning versus grinding. J Mater Process Tech 2008; 197(1-3):189-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.054.

Queiroz JRC, Paulo GP, Özcan M, Nogueira Jr. L Effect of airborne particle abrasion protocols on surface topography of Y-TZP ceramic. Cerâmica 2012; 58(346):253-61. doi: 10.1590/S0366-69132012000200017.

Lima LM, Motisuki C, dos Santos-Pinto L, dos Santos-Pinto A, Corat EJ. Cutting characteristics of dental diamond burs made with CVD technology. Braz Oral Res 2006; 20(2):155-61. doi: 10.1590/S1806-83242006000200012.

Kou W, Molin M, Sjogren G. Surface roughness of five different dental ceramic core materials after grinding and polishing. J Oral Rehabil 2006; 33(2):117-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01546.x.

Bollen CM, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M. comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. Dent Mater 1997; 13(4):258-69.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4034/PBOCI.2017.171.17