title: Postadjustment polishing of CAD-CAM ceramic with luminescence diamond gel.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  (1) to investigate by SEM and profilometry the effectiveness of Luminescence diamond polishing gel on machinable ceramic after adjustment grinding with different grit diamond finishing burs, and (2) to define a simple, time-saving ceramic finishing and polishing technique for clinically satisfactory results.
  
  
  METHODS
  Discs, 3 mm thick, were cut from Vita Mark II CAD-CAM ceramic and ground to a uniform surface finish on 600 grit wet SiC paper. Five specimens in each of the seven groups below were finished unidirectionally by a sweeping mode with the following Two Striper MFS diamond burs: 1. MF1 (45 microm); 2. MF2 (25 microm); 3. MF3 (10 microm); 4. MF1 + MF2; 5. MF1 + MF3; 6. MF2 + MF3; 7. MF1 + MF2 + MF3. Then, Luminescence diamond polishing gel was dispensed on a mandrel-mounted felt applicator and applied at 10,000 rpm for 60 s, and after dipping in water for another 60-s sequence. Surface roughness was determined for each step with a stylus-fitted surface analyzer. On each specimen five parallel tracings (evaluation length 4.0 mm and cut-off length 0.8 mm) were made 1 mm apart. Ra and Rz values were recorded as roughness parameters. Data was subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparison test at a significance level of alpha = 0.05. One additional sample for each grinding and polishing step in each of the seven groups was produced for SEM analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Diamond polishing after MF1 finishing reduced Ra and Rz significantly from 1.75 to 0.79, and from 10.0 to 4.09 microm, respectively, whereas the Ra and Rz reduction after MF3 finishing and diamond polishing were from 0.64 to 0.49 and from 4.31 to 1.81 microm. The polished surface roughness of specimens prefinished with MF2 or MF3 burs alone or as the final step after preceding grinding with coarser grits was not significantly different. The average Ra and Rz values were 0.42 microm and 1.73 microm. SEM photographs confirmed the uniformity of the surface finish in these groups. The second polishing sequence did not significantly improve the smoothness obtained with the first cycle.
authors.affiliation: Department of Preclinical Dentistry, Dental School, University of Cologne, Germany. wjfinger@aol.com
authors.forename: W J
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Finger
authors.forename: M D
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: Noack
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D017554:Carbon Compounds, Inorganic / Q000737:chemistry; D002516:Ceramics / Q000737:chemistry*; D017076:Computer-Aided Design; D003775:Dental Polishing / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D003776:Dental Porcelain / Q000737:chemistry; D018130:Diamond / Q000737:chemistry*; D005782:Gels; D006801:Humans; D008163:Luminescent Measurements; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D017655:Silicon Compounds / Q000737:chemistry; D013223:Statistics as Topic; D013499:Surface Properties; D014867:Water / Q000737:chemistry
chemical_list: D017554:Carbon Compounds, Inorganic; D005782:Gels; D017655:Silicon Compounds; C082340:Vita Mark II; D014867:Water; D003776:Dental Porcelain; D018130:Diamond; C022088:silicon carbide