SUMMARY

The purpose of this laboratory study was to compare the two-body wear resistance of different restorative materials commonly used for the indirect restoration of posterior teeth. The tested materials, based on ceramic (Imagine Press X, IPS e.max CAD, Milled Celtra Duo, Glaze-Fired Celtra Duo, Vita Mark II) and composite (Enamel Plus HRi, Enamel Plus HRi Bio-Function, Filtek Supreme XTE, Lava Ultimate), were compared with the wear properties of a type III gold alloy (Aurocast 8). Flat samples were prepared with a 6-mm thickness (n=10). Composite samples were tested after a heat polymerization cycle. All samples were exposed to a two-body wear test in a dual axis chewing simulator performing over 120,000 loading cycles. The opposing abrader cusps were fabricated from yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal. The vertical substance loss (mm) and the volume loss (mm3) were recorded, as was the wear of the antagonist cusp (mm). Mean values were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance. Significant differences among materials were detected. The heat-cured resin-based composite material Enamel Plus Bio-Function and the type III gold alloy demonstrated similar mean values for wear depth and volumetric loss.

You do not currently have access to this content.