IJD115_proof 4 September 2013 1/5

i n d i a n j o u r n a l o f d e n t i s t r y x x x ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 e5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijd

Original Article

Evaluating the effect of re-glazing on dental porcelain surfaces e An invitro study

Q3

R. Himabindu a,*, Vinod Krishnan b

a

Professor, Dept of Prosthodontics, Gitam Dental College & Hospital, GITAM Campus, Rushikonda, Visakhapatnam 530045, India b Professor, Dept of Prosthodontics, Amrita School of Dentistry, AIMS Campus, Ponekkara, Cochin 682030, India

article info
Article history: Received 31 May 2013 Accepted 29 July 2013 Keywords: Glazing Polishing Re-glazing Electron microscopy Micro cracks
Q1

abstract
Aim: The aim is to study the surface nish of ceramic restorations by glazing and polishing procedures and compare the surface morphology to determine the presence or absence of surface cracks on porcelain specimens observed under optical (light) microscope and a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Materials and methods: Thirty six specimens of vita VMK 68 No. 559 incisal porcelain were prepared and divided into eight groups (n 6) (Group IeGroup VI) and then subjected to various polishing and glazing procedures. The specimens were then observed under optical (light) microscope and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Results: Groups I, II, III, V, did not exhibit any surface cracks whereas Groups IV & VI which were ground, polished and then re-glazed exhibited micro cracks on the surface of the specimens. Conclusion: Dental porcelains which are extensively used in dentistry have been constantly evolving to maximize strength. Within the limitations of this study it was observed that the optical (light) microscope and SEM analysis correlate with each other. The specimen surfaces that were polished and then self-glazed exhibited formation of ne surface cracks. 2013 Indian Journal of Dentistry. All rights reserved.

Wear of natural dentition

1.

Introduction

Ceramics in modern dentistry is being used since the 18th century1 and has rapidly emerged as one of the major dental biomaterials in prosthodontics due to exceptional aesthetics and outstanding biocompatibility. But a major drawback is the abrasiveness to opposing natural dentition. Occlusal contacts between unglazed porcelain and enamel are undesirable because of the high rate of wear of enamel and

porcelain. When unglazed porcelain opposes natural teeth, the results of occlusal wear can be broadening of the occlusal table and loss of tooth structure.2 Several methods, from re-glazing to polishing, are available to achieve a smooth porcelain surface. Glazing of ceramic surfaces is recommended in order to improve the physical properties of dental ceramics. Plaque cannot accumulate on the glazed surface, and the brightness and surface features of the restoration can be retained long term.3 A smooth surface

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 91 9440448333 (mobile). E-mail addresses: himabinduravella@yahoo.co.in (R. Himabindu), vinusclinic@yahoo.com (V. Krishnan). 0975-962X/$ e see front matter 2013 Indian Journal of Dentistry. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2013.07.016

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

Please cite this article in press as: Himabindu R, Krishnan V, Evaluating the effect of re-glazing on dental porcelain surfaces e An invitro study, Indian Journal of Dentistry (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2013.07.016

IJD115_proof 4 September 2013 2/5

i n d i a n j o u r n a l o f d e n t i s t r y x x x ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 e5

131 improves the exural strength of the restoration and de132 creases abrasion against opposite teeth.4,5 However, the 133 dentist often removes part of the glazed surface after 134 cementation of the ceramic restoration because of the need 135 for occlusal adjustment, correction of inadequate contour, 136 or improvement of esthetics.6 By using various intraoral and 137 extra oral porcelain polishing kits smoothness levels equal 138 or better than those attained through glazing procedures 139 can be obtained. 140 141 142 143 2. Materials and methods 144 145 Thirty six porcelain test specimens are fabricated in the form 146 of discs in the dimensions of 10 mm diameter and 2 mm 147 thickness. Vita VMK 68 No. 559 incisal porcelain was the ma148 terial of choice as it is commonly used in fabrication of 149 150 ceramo-metal restorations. 600 mg of Vita VMK 68 No. 559 151 incisal porcelain pre weighed in an electronic balance and 152 0.4 ml of modeling uid supplied by the manufacturer 153 measured in a micropipette are mixed together. The mix is 154 placed in the metallic mold and the mold is placed in the 155 hydraulic press and compacted at 22,000 N/Sq. inch and red 156 in a commercially available porcelain vacuum furnace (Vita 157 Vacumat 50). Then the specimens are divided into six groups 158 of six specimens each and then subjected to grinding and 159 polishing procedures as done in the chair side of a dental 160 161 Q2 clinic or dental lab. 162 163 164 165 Group I d As red; 166 Group II d Self-glazed; 167 Group III d Self-glazed samples grinded with 220, 500, 600 and 800 168 grit silicon carbide paper followed by 0e2m diamond polish with a 169 felt wheel. 170 Group IV d The specimens are grinded and polished as above and 171 then subjected to re-glazing at 940  C for 4 min. 172 Group V d The self-glazed specimens are chair side polished using 173 a commercially available porcelain adjustment kit (Shofu). 174 Group VI d The specimens are polished as above and then re175 glazed at 940  C for 4 min. 176 177 178 179 180 The samples are examined under an optical microscope at 181 a resolution of 100 magnication and the nal image was 182 then viewed on a uorescent screen and recorded photo183 graphically. The porcelain samples viewed under the light 184 microscope are cleaned in acetone solution to remove any dirt 185 sticking to the surface and then air dried. The specimens are 186 then mounted on brass stubs and placed in Ion sputtering 187 device (JFC 1100E) where they are gold coated. The gold 188 189 coating increases the surface contrast and enables identi190 cation of areas of apparent smoothness and roughness. The 191 specimens are then re-examined at higher magnications e.g.: 192 500 or more in SEM (JSM 5300) where secondary electrons are 193 collected, amplied and used to form an image on the uo194 rescent screen of a cathode tube in a display unit which is 195 recorded on a camera attached to it.

3.

Results

Group I (As red) d Appears to be pitted and rough. Group II (Self-Glazed) d Surface appears to be smooth. Group III (Ground and Polished) d Surface appears to be smoother (Fig. 1). Group IV (Ground, polished and then re-glazed) d Surface less smooth, few voids and irregularities seen. Micro cracks are visible on the surface. The surface shows fragments which seem to be completely fractured leaving away a ragged chip on the surface (Figs. 2 and 3). Group V (Ground and polished using Shofu polishing kit) d Surface appears to be smoother (Fig. 4). Group VI (Polished and then re-glazed) d Surface appears to be chipped of in certain areas and rough. Voids are seen. Micro cracks are visible which are very ne in nature (Figs. 5 and 6).

It was observed that, the self-glazed (Group II); wet and polished specimens (Group III & V) surfaces appear to be smooth without any evidence of surface cracks. The polished and then re-glazed groups (IV & VI) showed signicant evidence of surface micro cracks which occurred at varying lengths and very ne in nature. Large variation in levels of cracking was observed. On comparison the average level of cracking observed in Group IV is 4744 mm/mm2 and in Group VI it is 3578 mm/mm2. The relative levels of cracking were determined by measuring crack length/unit area on SEM. Statistical analysis was not done because of the observational nature of the study.

4.

Discussion

Dental ceramics are known for their exhibit excellent tissue compatibility, extreme chemical durability and low thermal conductivity.7 A smooth surface is important in three terms: function, esthetics, and biologic compatibility. In fact, a surface compression layer was found to occur on a wide range of ceramic materials following different treatment processes that acts to strengthen ceramic material. It can be achieved by thermal tempering, machining and polishing and the application of a glazing layer with a lower coefcient of thermal expansion than the adjacent ceramic material. There are numerous instances in clinical practice when it is necessary to adjust a glazed porcelain surface by grinding. Such adjustments break the glaze, resulting in a rougher surface and inferior surface properties of the restoration.8 Early researchers agreed that re-glazing was necessary after porcelain adjustment in the clinical setting.9 Many dentists therefore, prefer the porcelain surface of a restoration to be re-glazed prior to cementation.10 The aim of glazing is to seal the open pores on the surface of a red porcelain. The ring of the porcelain must be carried out exactly according to the manufacturers instructions. If the crown should remain in the furnace for too long it will lose form, due to pyroplastic ow (ow of the molten glass), and will become highly glazed. A lower temperature and longer

196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260

Please cite this article in press as: Himabindu R, Krishnan V, Evaluating the effect of re-glazing on dental porcelain surfaces e An invitro study, Indian Journal of Dentistry (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2013.07.016

IJD115_proof 4 September 2013 3/5

i n d i a n j o u r n a l o f d e n t i s t r y x x x ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 e5

3
326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390

261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325

Fig. 1 e 0e2m diamond paste polished sample surface of incisal porcelain 1003 magnication (optical microscope).

Fig. 3 e 0e2m diamond paste polished and re-glazed sample surface of incisal porcelain exhibiting micro cracks under SEM at 7503 magnication.

time cycle should be the ceramists basic aim. In this way, the pyroplasticity of the crown is controlled to a level at which the surface will assume an enamel-like sheen but will not slump or ow at critical line angles. A very slow cooling rate is essential in order to avoid the possibility of cracking or crazing. On cooling from the furnace temperature, the outside of the porcelain will cool more rapidly than the interior, particularly as the porcelain has a low thermal conductivity. The outside surface contracts more than the inside initially, resulting in a compressive load on the outside and a residual tensile stress on the inside, as the interior is being prevented from shrinking by the outside skin. The application of a glaze with a slightly lower coefcient of expansion would potentially ll in the cracks and also place the surface under compression. Laser glazing (XeCl excimer and CO2 laser) improves surface hardness and smoothness of ceramic surfaces without affecting their internal structures. Conventional methods for the surface treatment of dental ceramic materials are not capable of creating a smooth surface without micro cracks.

The special radiation characteristics of both XeCl excimer and CO2 lasers make them suitable to treat ceramic surfaces in order to produce a glazed surface. It was suggested that laser treatment of ceramic surfaces inhibits the formation of micro cracks, leading to greater mechanical resistance of the ceramic.11 As for the present study the nishing surface of ceramic materials may involve contact with a rotating wheel, producing multipoint surface grinding. This generates numerous cracks that can result in chipping of the surface. As the abrasive contacts the surface of the material, compressive stresses can be generated and the area of compressive stress beneath each abrasive particle can overlap, producing a layer of compression which can partially close an existing surface crack. This can be the reason for the samples which were ground and polished (Groups III & V) not exhibiting any surface cracks on their surfaces. In the group of samples which were subjected to polishing and then re-glazed (Groups IV & VI) the surfaces exhibited micro cracks. As discussed earlier, during the procedure of grinding and polishing compressive

Fig. 2 e 0e2m diamond paste polished and then re-glazed sample surface of incisal porcelain 1003 magnication (optical microscope).

Fig. 4 e Chair side polished sample surface of incisal porcelain 1003 magnication (optical microscope).

Please cite this article in press as: Himabindu R, Krishnan V, Evaluating the effect of re-glazing on dental porcelain surfaces e An invitro study, Indian Journal of Dentistry (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2013.07.016

IJD115_proof 4 September 2013 4/5

4
391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455

i n d i a n j o u r n a l o f d e n t i s t r y x x x ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 e5

Fig. 5 e Chair side polished and re-glazed sample surface of incisal porcelain 1003 magnication (optical microscope).

residual stresses produced created a compressive layer that can close an existing surface crack. It is thereby assumed that when the samples are subjected to self-glazing again after polishing the compressive residual stresses may be released thereby, exhibiting the micro cracks on the surface.

5.

Review of literature

Glazing versus polishing techniques received recent attention in a review of a number of studies comparing prepared surfaces using visual, microscopic, and prolometry measures.12 The literature clearly shows that grinding, polishing, and glazing increase a restorations exural strength. Actually, many ceramists advocate polishing, rather than glazing, to control the surface luster, glossiness and the esthetic result of the ceramic restoration. Nasser Barghi & King (1975)13 who reported that smooth surface is obtained when polishing is followed by glazing. This

study also shows evidence of polished surfaces to be as smooth as that of self-glazed surfaces. Sulik and Plekavich (1981)14 reported that, with a wellcondensed porcelain surface, the surface achieved by polishing can be as smooth as that of a glazed surface and they found no differences clinically or by means of scanning electron microscopy, between the polished and naturally glazed surfaces of vacuum red porcelain. Some voids were present on the polished surface which were not evident on the glazed surface. Klausner et al (1982)15 who reported that no signicant differences were found between the nal polished surfaces and auto-glazed surfaces. Kazuyuki and Tomozawa (1987)16 who declared that the thermal effect of laser would melt a thin supercial layer of ceramic surface and this layer would ll in surface aws, reducing their depth and blunting the aw tips. This should provide an increase in hardness because, for a given ceramic material, strength and hardness would increase with decreasing aw depth and sharpness. Wiley (1989)17 suggested that a polished surface may be as acceptable as a glazed surface. Rosenstiel et al (1989)18 found that the fracture toughness of polished porcelain was greater than that of glazed porcelain. Edge and Wagner (1994)19 whose study coincides with the present study reported that surface cracking was identied in polished and then self-glazed specimens of dental porcelain. Giordano et al (1994)20 and Williamson et al (1996)21 found that mechanical polishing increases the surface resistance of a ceramic restoration more than the natural glaze and over glaze processes do. Few other studies 1988,22 1990,23 200624 have shown that polished ceramics produced surfaces that were as smooth as glazed ceramics, or provided smoother surfaces than glazing.

6.

Conclusion

Fig. 6 e Chair side polished and re-glazed sample surface of incisal porcelain exhibiting micro cracks under SEM at 5003 magnication.

It is a common clinical practice to adjust ceramic restorations to correct occlusal interferences, improve esthetic appearance, nish the margins of porcelain e bonded restorations, and improve surface smoothness. The dental practitioner can choose between several different polishing methods to achieve a surface equal to or better than over-glazing. An advantage of polishing is that it affords greater control of the surface luster and distribution than does glazing.25 Using various intraoral and extra oral porcelain polishing kits, smoothness levels equal or better than those attained through glazing procedures can be obtained.26 Within the limitations of this study it was observed that the optical (light) microscope and SEM analysis correlate with each other. The specimen surfaces that were polished and then self-glazed exhibited formation of ne surface cracks. This observation is of clinical signicance as it might lead to chipping of porcelain surfaces leading to wear of natural dentition. Therefore, it can be concluded from this study is that the restorations which need adjustments should be subjected to polishing methods instead of re-glazing it again.

456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520

Please cite this article in press as: Himabindu R, Krishnan V, Evaluating the effect of re-glazing on dental porcelain surfaces e An invitro study, Indian Journal of Dentistry (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2013.07.016

IJD115_proof 4 September 2013 5/5

i n d i a n j o u r n a l o f d e n t i s t r y x x x ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 e5

5
570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618

521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569

Conicts of interest
11.

All authors have none to declare.

12.

Acknowledgments
13.

1. Dr. KSGA Nasser MDS, TNGDC, Chennai. 2. Prof. FD Gnanam, Anna University, Chennai. 3. Prof. Gokularatnam, IIT, Chennai.

14. 15.

references
16. 1. Mezler Kurt, Woody Ronald D, Miller III Amp W, Miller Barbara H. In vitro investigation of the wear of human enamel by dental porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;81:356e364. 2. Schissel Edward R, Newitter David A, Renner Robert R, Gwinnet A John. An evaluation of post adjustment polishing techniques for porcelain denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1980;43:258e265. 3. Al-Wahadni A. An in vitro investigation into the surface roughness of 2 glazed, unglazed and renished ceramic materials. Quintessence Int. 2006;37(4):311e317. 4. Giordano RA, Cima M, Pober R. Effects of surface nish on the exural strength of feldspathic and aluminous dental ceramics. Int J Prosthodont. 1995;8(4):311e319. 5. Chu FCS, Frankel N, Smales RJ. Surface roughness and exural strength of self glazed, polished, and reglazed inceram/vitadur alpha porcelain laminates. Int J Prosthodont. 2000;13(1):66e71. 6. Wright MD, Masri R, Driscoll CF, Romberg E, Thompson GA, Runyan DA. Comparison of three systems for the polishing of ultra-low fusing dental porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 2004;92:486e490. 7. Baker PS, Clark Jr AE. Compositional inuence on the strength of dental porcelain. Int J Prosthodont. 1993;6:291e297. 8. Fuzzi Massimo, Zaccheroni Zoran, Vallania Giovanni. Scanning electron microscopy and prolometer evaluation of glazed and polished dental porcelain. Int J Prosthodont. 1996;9:452e458. 9. Barghi N, Alexander L, Draughn RA. When to glaze e an electron microscope study. J Prosthet Dent. 1976;35:648e653. 10. Newitter DA, Schlissel E, Wolff MS. An evaluation of adjustment and post adjustment nishing techniques on the

17. 18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23. 24.

25.

26.

surface of porcelain-bonded-to-metal crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 1982;43:388e395. Jervis TR, Nastasi M, Hubbard KM, Hirvonen J. Excimer laser surface processing of ceramics: process and properties. J Am Ceram Soc. 1993;76:350. Al-Wahadni A, Martin DM. Glazing and nishing dental porcelain: a literature review. J Can Dent Assoc. 1998;64:580e583. Barghi N, King CJ, Draughn R. A study of porcelain surfaces as generally utilized in xed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 1975;34:314e319. Sulik WD, Plekavich EJ. Surface nishing of dental porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 1981;46:217e221. Klausner LH, Cartwright CB, Charbeneau GT. Polished versus autoglazed porcelain surfaces. J Prosthet Dent. 1982;47:157e162. Kazuyuki H, Tomozawa M. Dynamic fatigue of treated highsilica glass: explanation by crack tip blunting. J Am Ceram Soc. 1987;70:377. Wiley MG. Effects of porcelain on occluding surface of restored teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1989;61:133e137. Rosenstiel SF, Baiker MA, Johnston WM. A comparison of glazed and polished dental porcelain. Int J Prosthodont. 1989;2:524e529. Edge Marion J, Wagner Warren C. Surface cracking identied in polished and self-glazed dental porcelain. J Prosthodont. 1994;3:130e133. Giordano 2nd RA, Campbell S, Pober R. Flexural strength of feldspathic porcelain treated with ion exchange, overglaze, and polishing. J Prosthet Dent. 1994;71(5):468e472. Williamson RT, Kovarik RE, Mitchell RJ. Effects of grinding, polishing, and overglazing on the exure strength of a highleucite feldspathic porcelain. Int J Prosthodont. 1996;9(1):30e37. Haywood VB, Heymann HO, Kusy RP, Whitley JQ, Andreaus SB. Polishing porcelain veneers: an SEM and specular reectance analysis. Dent Mater. 1988;4:116e121. Raimondo Jr RL, Richardson JT, Wiedner B. Polished versus autoglazed dental porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 1990;64:553e557. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Yuzbasioglu E, Bal S. The effects of porcelain polishing systems on the color and surface texture of feldspathic porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96:122e128. Hubbard JR. Natural texture and luster in ceramics. In: Preston JD, ed. Perspectives in Dental Ceramics. Quintessence; 1988:263e266. Sasahara RMC, Riberio FC, Cesar PF, et al. Inuence of the nishing technique on surface roughness of dental porcelains with different microstructures. Oper Dent. 2006;31(5):557e583.

Please cite this article in press as: Himabindu R, Krishnan V, Evaluating the effect of re-glazing on dental porcelain surfaces e An invitro study, Indian Journal of Dentistry (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2013.07.016