Özet:

The aim of our study is to evaluate the effects of the four different surface preparation methods in the zirkonian restorations repained with composite resin using two different oral porselen repairing sets (APTS). Tools and methods: In the form of a disk (2 x 5 mm) 80 pieces of zirkonium and 80 pieces of zirkonium-backed porselain samples are prepared. The L*a*b* values of the samples are recorded and the porselain and zirconium samples for two different APTS (Clearfil Repair and Ceramic Repair N) are divided into two. In these main groups, 40 samples are divided into 4 subgroups (N = 10) for the application of four different surface preparation processes (elmas freezle smoothing, oral smoothing, long and short shooting Er,Cr:YSGG laser radiation). The APTSs and composite resins compatible with these kit (Clearfil Majesty Esthetic and Tetric N Ceram) are practiced on sample surfaces. Composite resins are placed with incremental technique using a standard teflon pattern (2 x 2 mm) on each zirconium and porcelain surface. The refined sample surfaces record L*a*b* values and the ΔE values are calculated using the corresponding formula. The initial and result color differences are recorded and statistical analysis (one-way variance analysis) is carried out.   Results: Color differences calculated according to APTS and surface preparation processes are higher than clinically acceptable values (ΔE = 5.5). Long-rise laser radiation and Clearfil Repair APTS are applied to the group low ∆E value (ΔE = 5. 90 is shown. A group of zirconium samples in which the short-rise laser radiation and Clearfil Repair APTS were applied showed a high color change (ΔE=13.65) compared to other groups. Result: Colour differences according to the first colors of refined zirkonium and zirkonium-backed porselen are not clinically acceptable, regardless of their types, the methods of surface preparation used and the APTS applied.    Keywords: Zirconium oxide, dental porselen, composite dental resin, dental prothesis repair, color, spectrophotometer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of four different surface treatment procedures on color alterations of zirconia restorations that were repaired with composite resin using two different intraoral porcelain repair systems.  Materials and method: 80 zirconia and 80 zirconia-based porcelain veneer were used to prepare disc-shaped specimens (2 x 5 mm). L*a*b* values of specimens were recorded, and the zirconia and the porcelain specimens were divided into two main groups for two different intraoral porcelain repair systems (Clearfil Repair and Ceramic Repair N). 40 specimens in that main groups were divided into four subgroups (N = 10) in order to perform four different surface treatment procedures (surface grinding with diamond bur, intraoral sandblasting, long pulse and short pulse of Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation). The intraoral porcelain repair kits and composite resins (Clearfil Majesty Esthetic Tetric N Ceram) that are compatible with the repair kits were applied to the surface of the specimens. Composite resins were built-up on each zirconia and porcelain surfaces using a standard teflon mold (2 x 2 mm) and incrementally filled. L*a*b* values of repaired specimens were recorded and ΔE values were calculated using the formula. Color differences between the initial and final records were statistically analyzed (1-way ANOVA). Results: The color changes that calculated upon surface treatments and intraoral porcelain repair kits were higher than the clinical acceptability threshold (ΔE = 5.5). Zirconia-based porcelain specimens that were treated long pulse laser irradiation and repaired using Clearfil Repair intraoral porcelain repair kit group showed the lowest ∆E value (ΔE = 5.90). Short pulse laser irradiation applied zirconia specimens that were repaired with Clearfil Repair kit group illustrated highest color changes (ΔE = 13.65) among the tested groups. Conclusion: The color differences of repaired zirconia and zirconia-based porcelain veneer, regardless of their type, surface treatment method, and applied intraoral porcelain repair kit, was not clinically acceptable when compared to the initial shade of the specimens.  Keywords: Zirconium oxide, dental porcelain, composite dental resin, dental prosthesis repair, color, spectrophotometry.

Anahtar Kelimeler: