IADR 95th

63/75

-63-initial LiSiPress3218 Study on Characteristics of Lithium DisilicateCeramicsPoster Presentation11:00 AM–12:15 PM Mar 25, 2017CC, First Floor Authors:Authors:KatsuraOhashi(Presenter)Kanagawa Dental UniversityKaori Miyake, Kanagawa Dental UniversityYuka Kameyama, Kanagawa Dental UniversityYuki Wada, Kanagawa Dental UniversityTomoyasu Midono, Kanagawa Dental UniversityTomotaroNihei, Kanagawa Dental UniversityAbstract: Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate wear resistance and chemical solubility for acid solution of lithium disilicateceramics.Methods: The ceramics used in this study were GC Initial LiSiPress (GC), IPS e.max Press (IvoclarVivadent) and Vintage LD Press (Shofu) as lithium disilicateceramics, and VitablocsMark II (Vita Zahnfabrik) as a feldspar ceramic. The specimens were prepared with size of 8-mm diameter and 3-mm thickness for two-body wear test (n=7), and 30-cm2in total surface area for chemical 3-mm thickness for two-body wear test (n=7), and 30-cm2in total surface area for chemical solubility test (n=3). After polishing with the silicon carbide paper until #600-grid, wear test at 4-kg lode for 10,000-cycles (K655, Tokyo-GikenCo.) was performed, and then the specimens were analyzed by measuring the maximum wear depth (µm) with a laser-microscope (VR-3100, Keyence). After polished using the silicon carbide paper until #1000-grid, the chemical solubility test was performed by immersing into 4-vol% acetic acid at 80°C for 16-hours. Solubility was analyzed by measuring the weight loss (µg/cm2). These data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’smultiple comparison test (α=0.05).Results: In two-body wear test, LiSiPress showed the lowest wear depth (11.0 µm), significantly lower compared with other ceramics groups. The wear depth of e.max Press (20.5-µm) showed significantly lower compared with LD Press and Vitablocs, and significantly higher compared with LiSiPress. The solubility of LiSiPress was the lowest (2.4-µg/cm2), and the amount of dissolution of LD Press was not significantly different compared to e.max Press and Vitablocs.Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that LiSiPress has higher wear resistances and acid durability compared with other lithium disilicateceramics.Table(s):Table(s):ceramicwear depth (µm)(S.D.)LiSi Press11.0 a-3.1e.max Press20.5 b-2.5LD Press28.1 c-2.4Vitablocs27.0 c-5.5ceramicamount of dissolution (µg/cm2)(S.D.)LiSi Press2.40 a-0.18e.max Press13.25 b-0.47LD Press14.15 b,c-0.35Vitablocs14.96 c-0.58Disclosure Statement:The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: noneI have read the IADR policy on licensing.Signed by KatsuraOhashiReprinted with permission from the Journal of Dental Research, J Dent Res 96 (Spec Iss A):-63-abstract number 3218, https://iadr2017.zerista.com/event/member/330704, 2017