J Adv Prosthodont.  2017 Apr;9(2):138-142. 10.4047/jap.2017.9.2.138.

Metal stain on monolithic zirconia restoration: A case report

• Cha MS
• Lee SW
• Huh YH
• Cho LR
• Park CJ

• KMID: 2376302
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.2.138

Abstract

In restorative treatment using fixed dental prostheses, dentists should select appropriate restoration material among various types of dental materials. The strength, marginal fit, esthetics, wear resistance, biocompatibility, and cost are important factors in the choice of restoration materials. The present case showed a surface stain on a monolithic zirconia restoration that was due to wear between the monolithic zirconia restoration and the base metal alloy restoration. This phenomenon was confirmed by surface roughness measurement and electron probe micro-analysis.

Keyword

Zirconia; Stain; Dental alloy; Wear

MeSH Terms

Alloys
Dental Alloys
Dental Materials
Dental Prosthesis
Dentists
Esthetics
Humans
Alloys
Dental Alloys
Dental Materials

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Panoramic radiograph of a patient.

• 

  Fig. 2 Intraoral view of the patient. (A) Left lateral view, (B) Maxillary occlusal view, (C) Mandibular occlusal view.

• 

  Fig. 3 Intraoral view of left mandibular second premolar and first molar. (A) Before occlusal adjustment, (B) After occlusal adjustment.

• 

  Fig. 4 Secondary electron image of the left mandibular first molar restoration (×200 original magnification).

• 

  Fig. 5 EPMA images of the left mandibular first molar restoration. (A) Zr mapping, (B) O mapping, (C) Ni mapping, (D) Cr mapping, (E) Mo mapping, (F) Si mapping.

• 

  Fig. 6 Intraoral view of the patient on a recent visit. (A) Maxillary occlusal view, (B) Mandibular occlusal view.

Reference

1. Guess PC, Att W, Strub JR. Zirconia in fixed implant prosthodontics. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012; 14:633–645. PMID: 21176095.

2. Carames J, Tovar Suinaga L, Yu YC, Pérez A, Kang M. Clinical Advantages and Limitations of Monolithic Zirconia Restorations Full Arch Implant Supported Reconstruction: Case Series. Int J Dent. 2015; 2015:392496. PMID: 26124835.

3. Sailer I, Fehér A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Lüthy H, Hämmerle CH. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont. 2007; 20:383–388. PMID: 17695869.

4. Jiang L, Liao Y, Wan Q, Li W. Effects of sintering temperature and particle size on the translucency of zirconium dioxide dental ceramic. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2011; 22:2429–2435. PMID: 21922331.

5. Wataha JC. Alloys for prosthodontic restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2002; 87:351–363. PMID: 12011845.

6. Amer R, Kürklü D, Kateeb E, Seghi RR. Three-body wear potential of dental yttrium-stabilized zirconia ceramic after grinding, polishing, and glazing treatments. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112:1151–1155. PMID: 24836531.

7. Burgess JO, Janyavula S, Lawson NC, Lucas TJ, Cakir D. Enamel wear opposing polished and aged zirconia. Oper Dent. 2014; 39:189–194. PMID: 23848069.

8. 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; 40:979–988. PMID: 22892464.

9. 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; 42:1586–1591. PMID: 25257823.

10. Stober T, Bermejo JL, Schwindling FS, Schmitter M. Clinical assessment of enamel wear caused by monolithic zirconia crowns. J Oral Rehabil. 2016; 43:621–629. PMID: 27198539.

11. Mundhe K, Jain V, Pruthi G, Shah N. Clinical study to evaluate the wear of natural enamel antagonist to zirconia and metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:358–363. PMID: 25985742.

12. Huh YH, Park CJ, Cho LR. Evaluation of various polishing systems and the phase transformation of monolithic zirconia. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116:440–449. PMID: 27061631.

13. Preis V, Weiser F, Handel G, Rosentritt M. Wear performance of monolithic dental ceramics with different surface treatments. Quintessence Int. 2013; 44:393–405.

14. Kontos L, Schille C, Schweizer E, Geis-Gerstorfer J. Influence of surface treatment on the wear of solid zirconia. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013; 71:482–487. PMID: 23638857.

15. Saiki O, Koizumi H, Nogawa H, Hiraba H, Akazawa N, Matsumura H. Influence of ceramic surface texture on the wear of gold alloy and heat-pressed ceramics. Dent Mater J. 2014; 33:865–873. PMID: 25483387.

16. 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; 13:258–269. PMID: 11696906.

17. Kanbara T, Sekine H, Homma S, Yajima Y, Yoshinari M. Wear behavior between zirconia and titanium as an antagonist on fixed dental prostheses. Biomed Mater. 2014; 9:025005. PMID: 24495945.

18. Koran A, Craig RG, Tillitson EW. Coefficient of friction of prosthetic tooth materials. J Prosthet Dent. 1972; 27:269–274. PMID: 4501138.

19. Oh WS, Delong R, Anusavice KJ. Factors affecting enamel and ceramic wear: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 2002; 87:451–459. PMID: 12011863.

20. Kanbara T, Yajima Y, Yoshinari M. Wear behavior of tetragonal zirconia polycrystal versus titanium and titanium alloy. Biomed Mater. 2011; 6:021001. PMID: 21393812.