This clinical case report describes the fabrication of monolithic self-glazed zirconia prostheses via a digital workflow, for full-arch rehabilitation in a patient with a severely worn dentition. Prostheses composed of self-glazed zirconia are less prone to chipping, and have a lower risk of progressive wear of the opposing natural teeth. The use of a digital workflow not only ensures a higher degree of precision in the fabrication of self-glazed zirconia prostheses, but it also greatly improves patient comfort, and reduces the clinical chairside time required for adjustments.
KumarSN, PatilNP, GuttalSS, Full mouth rehabilitation of severely attrited dentition. A case report. N Y State Dent J. 2010;76(2):47–50.
2.
NamJ, TokutomiH.Using zirconia-based prosthesis in a complete-mouth reconstruction treatment for worn dentition with the altered vertical dimension of occlusion. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113(2):81–85. DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.08.001.
3.
LinkeviciusT, VaitelisJ.The effect of zirconia or titanium as abutment material on soft peri-implant tissues: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26:139–147. DOI:10.1111/clr.12631.
4.
LameiraDP, Buarque e SilvaWA, Andrade e SilvaF, Fracture strength of aged monolithic and bilayer zirconia-based crowns. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:418641. DOI:10.1155/2015/418641.
5.
ZhaoK, WeiYR, PanY, Influence of veneer and cyclic loading on failure behavior of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic molar crowns. Dent Mater. 2014;30(2):164–171. DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2013.11.001.
6.
LiuY, WangY, WangD, Self-glazed zirconia reducing the wear to tooth enamel. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2016;36(12):2889–2894. DOI:10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2015.11.029.
7.
WatahaJC, DruryJL, ChungWO.Nickel alloys in the oral environment. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013;10(4):519–539. DOI:10.1586/17434440.2013.811868.
8.
BonfanteEA, SuzukiM, LorenzoniFC, Probability of survival of implant-supported metal ceramic and CAD/CAM resin nanoceramic crowns. Dent Mater. 2015;31(8):E168–E177. DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2015.05.006.
9.
ChongBJ, ThangavelAK, RoltonSB, Clinical and laboratory surface finishing procedures for zirconia on opposing human enamel wear: A laboratory study. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;50:93–103. DOI:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.06.007.
10.
Bankoglu GungorM, Karakoca NemliS.Fracture resistance of CAD-CAM monolithic ceramic and veneered zirconia molar crowns after aging in a mastication simulator. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(3):473–480. DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.05.003.
11.
NordahlN, von SteyernPV, LarssonC.Fracture strength of ceramic monolithic crown systems of different thickness. J Oral Sci. 2015;57(3):255–261. DOI:10.2334/josnusd.57.255.
12.
JanyavulaS, LawsonN, CakirD, The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(1):22–29. DOI:10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60005-0.
13.
BeuerF, StimmelmayrM, GuethJF, In vitro performance of full-contour zirconia single crowns. Dent Mater. 2012;28(4):449–456. DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.024.
14.
JungYS, LeeJW, ChoiYJ, A study on the in-vitro wear of the natural tooth structure by opposing zirconia or dental porcelain. J Adv Prosthodont. 2010;2(3):111–115. DOI:10.4047/jap.2010.2.3.111.
15.
LawsonNC, JanyavulaS, SyklawerS, Wear of enamel opposing zirconia and lithium disilicate after adjustment, polishing and glazing. J Dent. 2014;42(12):1586–1591. DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.09.008.
16.
AmerR, KürklüD, KateebE, Three-body wear potential of dental yttrium-stabilized zirconia ceramic after grinding, polishing, and glazing treatments. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(5):1151–1155. DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.021.
17.
GundugolluY, YalavarthyRS, KrishnaMH, Comparison of the effect of monolithic and layered zirconia on natural teeth wear: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2018;18(4):336–342. DOI:10.4103/jips.jips_105_18.
18.
MitovG, HeintzeSD, WalzS, Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures. Dent Mater. 2012;28(8):909–918. DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.010.
19.
RenW, DuF, ShenZ, The workflows of a novel self-glazed zirconia for dental prostheses fabrication: case reports. Adv Appl Ceram. 2018;117(7):406–413. DOI:10.1080/17436753.2018.1462297.
20.
ShenZ, LiuL, XuX, Fractography of self-glazed zirconia with improved reliability. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2017;37(14):4339–4345. DOI:10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2017.03.008.
21.
ZhangY, HanJ-M, ZhengG, Fatigue behaviours of the zirconia dental restorations prepared by two manufacturing methods. Adv Appl Ceram. 2017;116(7):368–375. DOI:10.1080/17436753.2017.1336365.
22.
ShiA, WuZ, HuangJ, Wear performance of self-glazed zirconia crowns with different amount of occlusal adjustment after 6 months of clinical use. Adv Appl Ceram. 2018;117(8):445–451. DOI:10.1080/17436753.2018.1477567.
23.
ChristensenGJ.Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc. 2009;140(10):1301–1304. DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0054.
24.
YuzbasiogluE, KurtH, TuruncR, Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health. 2014;14:10. DOI:10.1186/1472-6831-14-10.
