Cutting Efficiency of Diamond Burs with Different Coatings on Ceramic and Resin Composite Materials after Multiple Use.

IF 1.2 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry Pub Date : 2025-05-28 DOI:10.1922/EJPRD_2892Erlinger09
A Erlinger, N Al-Haj Husain, L F B Souza, T F Eyüboğlu, M Özcan
{"title":"Cutting Efficiency of Diamond Burs with Different Coatings on Ceramic and Resin Composite Materials after Multiple Use.","authors":"A Erlinger, N Al-Haj Husain, L F B Souza, T F Eyüboğlu, M Özcan","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2892Erlinger09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluated the cutting efficiency of dental burs with different surface coatings on various reconstruction materials and analyzed the microscopic changes after multiple uses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty block specimens (N=35, n=7) were prepared from various materials: CAD/CAM PMMA, direct resin composite, lithium disilicate, CAD/CAM nano-hybrid composite, and zirconia (12x4x4 mm³). The specimens were randomly assigned to cut under water cooling with one of seven bur types: Bur 1 (FG 307 CB), Bur 2 (6881.314.016), Bur 3 (FG 307 C), Bur 4 (ZR6881.314.016), Bur 5 (Prototype), Bur 6 (Prototype), and Bur 7 (Prototype). Each bur was used 10 times with a cutting depth of 3 mm. Images were taken of unused, used, and ultrasonically cleaned burs prior to data analysis (α=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cutting efficiency varied significantly by material and bur type (p⟨0.05). Bur 3 and Bur 5 were most effective for PMMA, while Burs 5, 6, and 7 excelled with direct resin composite. Bur 7 was best for CAD/CAM composite, Bur 3 for lithium disilicate, and Bur 6 for zirconia. Burs 1 and 2 consistently performed poorly.</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>Bur selection is important for efficient cutting, reducing chair time, material wear, and costs while improving restoration precision and bur longevity.</p>","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":"180-188"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2892Erlinger09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study evaluated the cutting efficiency of dental burs with different surface coatings on various reconstruction materials and analyzed the microscopic changes after multiple uses.

Methods: Thirty block specimens (N=35, n=7) were prepared from various materials: CAD/CAM PMMA, direct resin composite, lithium disilicate, CAD/CAM nano-hybrid composite, and zirconia (12x4x4 mm³). The specimens were randomly assigned to cut under water cooling with one of seven bur types: Bur 1 (FG 307 CB), Bur 2 (6881.314.016), Bur 3 (FG 307 C), Bur 4 (ZR6881.314.016), Bur 5 (Prototype), Bur 6 (Prototype), and Bur 7 (Prototype). Each bur was used 10 times with a cutting depth of 3 mm. Images were taken of unused, used, and ultrasonically cleaned burs prior to data analysis (α=0.05).

Results: Cutting efficiency varied significantly by material and bur type (p⟨0.05). Bur 3 and Bur 5 were most effective for PMMA, while Burs 5, 6, and 7 excelled with direct resin composite. Bur 7 was best for CAD/CAM composite, Bur 3 for lithium disilicate, and Bur 6 for zirconia. Burs 1 and 2 consistently performed poorly.

Significance: Bur selection is important for efficient cutting, reducing chair time, material wear, and costs while improving restoration precision and bur longevity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同涂层金刚石毛刺在陶瓷和树脂复合材料上多次使用后的切削效率
目的:评价不同表面涂层的牙毛刺在不同重建材料上的切削效率,并分析多次使用后的显微变化。方法:采用CAD/CAM PMMA、直接树脂复合材料、二硅酸锂、CAD/CAM纳米杂化复合材料、氧化锆(12x4x4 mm³)等不同材料制备30块样品(N=35, N= 7)。在水冷条件下,随机选取7种钢钎类型中的一种进行切割:bur 1 (FG 307 CB)、bur 2(6881.314.016)、bur 3 (FG 307 C)、bur 4 (ZR6881.314.016)、bur 5(样机)、bur 6(样机)和bur 7(样机)。每个钻孔使用10次,切割深度为3mm。在数据分析前,分别对未使用的、使用过的和超声清洗过的毛刺进行图像采集(α=0.05)。结果:不同材料和刀具类型的切削效率差异显著(p⟨0.05)。br 3和br 5对PMMA效果最好,br 5、br 6和br 7对直接树脂复合效果最好。br 7是CAD/CAM复合材料的最佳材料,br 3是二硅酸锂的最佳材料,br 6是氧化锆的最佳材料。Burs 1和Burs 2一直表现不佳。意义:钢钎的选择对于有效切割,减少椅时间,材料磨损和成本,同时提高修复精度和钢钎寿命至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.
期刊最新文献
A Narrative Review on the Survival and Success Rates of Dental Veneers in Contemporary Dentistry. The Effect of Various Remineralizing Agents on Post-bleaching Shade Stability: A Randomized Double-blind Clinical Study. Evaluating the Long-Term Success of Removable and Fixed Prosthodontic Treatment in Completely Edentulous Patients: Comparative Clinical- Radiographic Study. Mandibular Advancement Devices for Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Printed Versus Conventional Denture Base Resins: Physical- Mechanical Evaluation After Immersion in Beverages and Cleansers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1