Comparison of Different Cleaning Procedures for Decontaminating Zirconium Oxide Surface After Polishing.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of cleaning protocols for the decontamination of organic compounds from polished zirconium oxide samples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 24 rectangular plate specimens were sintered from zirconium oxide. All samples were polished with commercially available polishers (coarse, fine, and superfine) and polishing paste. During the first step of the protocol, all specimens were cleaned with steam. Samples were then randomly assigned to one of three groups (n = 8 each): A, B, or C. In group A, no additional cleaning was performed, while specimens in group B underwent ultrasonic cleaning in distilled water. Group C specimens were cleaned in an ultrasonic bath with a special detergent solution. After washing, samples were subjected to energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) examination. In order to detect organic materials, the level of carbon atoms was measured. RESULTS: EDX analysis revealed that samples in group A had the highest percent of carbon atoms (9.57 ± 3.67) on the surface compared to other cleaning protocols. Following the Group B cleaning protocol resulted in lower carbon levels (4.73 ± 3.56), but this difference was not significant compared to group A (P = .439). None of the specimens in group C had detectable carbon atoms (0), which implies that all wax molecules were removed (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Total decontamination of organic compounds from a polished zirconium surface can be expected only following the C cleaning protocol; therefore, it is advised to employ an ultrasonic bath with detergent solution for cleaning procedures of zirconium abutments before delivery. Int J Prosthodont 2023;36:588-594.

Influence of Cement Type on its Quality of Removal from Zirconium Oxide Implant-Supported Restorations

PURPOSE: To assess excess cement removal after cementation of implant-supported cementretained restorations using different cements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A dental model with soft tissue imitation, 20 individual zirconium oxide abutments, and 20 zirconium oxide crowns were fabricated. Half of the restorations were cemented using resin cement (RX) and the other half with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (GC). After cement cleaning, each crown-abutment unit was removed from the model, photographed, and analyzed from 4 surfaces, resulting in a final sample size of 80 measurements. Radiographic examination and the computerized planimetric method in Adobe Photoshop were used to determine the amount of the cement left and to evaluate the ratio between the area of cement residue and the whole crown-abutment surface. The significance was set to .05. RESULTS: GC resulted in 7.4% more cement residue on all surfaces (P < .05) than RX. The P value on three of the surfaces (all except mesial) was < .05, meaning that the data were statistically significantly different between groups and surfaces. Absolute removal of the cement was impossible in all cases (100%), and in 95% of the cases, cement remnants could not be detected radiographically. CONCLUSION: More undetected cement remains when using resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. It was impossible to remove excess of both types of cements completely. Most of the cement remains on the distal surface. Radiographic examination could not be considered as a reliable method to identify excess cement.

The Effect of a Polishing Protocol on the Surface Roughness of Zirconium Oxide.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the surface roughness values of zirconium oxide samples that were gradually polished using a commercially available polishing system and polishing paste. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 rectangular specimens of predetermined size (10 × 10 × 3 mm) were sintered from zirconium oxide. Samples were randomly assigned to one of five groups (n = 10 each): control, coarse (Co), fine (F), super fine (SF), or polishing paste (PP). In the control group, no polishing was done; in the Co group, a coarse polisher was used; and the specimens in the remaining three groups underwent additional processing with a fine rubber abrasive. For SF and PP samples, subsequent treatment with a super fine polisher was applied. Finally, for the PP group, a goat-hair brush with diamond polishing paste was used. An optical profilometer was used to evaluate roughness average (Ra) in micrometers (µm). ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests were utilized to detect differences between groups. The significance level was set to α = .05. RESULTS: Surface roughness gradually decreased with further polishing throughout the groups: control Ra = 0.525 ± 0.099 µm; Co Ra = 0.252 ± 0.038 µm; F Ra = 0.196 ± 0.035 µm; SF Ra = 0.114 ± 0.031 µm; and PP Ra = 0.054 ± 0.020 µm. Statistically significant differences were detected among all groups (P < .05). CONCLUSION: A surface roughness of 0.054 µm can be achieved if a full zirconia polishing protocol is used. Zirconium oxide can be polished to various surface roughnesses using commercially available polishing products.