Effect of Erbium, Chromium-doped Yttrium, Scandium, Gallium, and Garnet 2.7 nm Laser on Debonding of Computer-aided Design and Computer-aided Manufacturing Endocrowns
Ahmed EL Hawary, Ahmed Abbas, Tarek Harhash
All ceramic restoration, CAD/CAM, Debonding, Endocrown, Effect of erbium, Chromium-doped yttrium, Scandium, Gallium and garnet 2.7 nm Laser on Debonding of CAD/CAM Endocrowns
Citation Information :
EL Hawary A, Abbas A, Harhash T. Effect of Erbium, Chromium-doped Yttrium, Scandium, Gallium, and Garnet 2.7 nm Laser on Debonding of Computer-aided Design and Computer-aided Manufacturing Endocrowns. World J Dent 2018; 9 (5):349-354.
The most common method for the removal of all-ceramic restorations is to use a highspeed handpiece with a stone or bur. Unfortunately, this process can be difficult, time-consuming and may lead to the loss of healthy tooth structures. Lasers have been suggested and used to remove ceramic orthodontic brackets, laminate veneers and full anatomical crowns.
Aim: Aim of the present study was to evaluate the debonding effect of erbium, chromium-doped yttrium, scandium, gallium and garnet (ErCr:YSGG) on Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) end crown restorations.
Materials and methods: Overall, 30 molar samples were prepared for this study and divided into two groups as follows:
Group A–(n = 15): Endocrowns subjected to ErCr:YSGG laser application.
Group B–(n = 15): Endocrowns not subjected to the laser (control). Endocrowns were fabricated from lithium disilicate ceramics and manufactured using a CAD/CAM machine. Cementation was done using Bisco Duo Link Universal™ resin cement. ErCr:YSGG laser was used with wavelength 2780 nm, 0.3J energy, 10 Hz frequency and 1000 μm tip size. Pull out test was done using a universal testing machine.
Results: It was found that Non-laser group recorded statistically significant (p < 0.05) higher mean value (258.14 ± 63.43 N) for debonding than Laser group mean value (156.66 ± 32.89 N) as indicated by student t-test. Additionally, no carbonization at the dentin/cement interface was observed.
Conclusion: According to the results of this study, ErCr: YSGG application can be considered a conservative method for the debonding of all ceramic endocrowns.
Clinical significance: Some practitioners have been against the use of endocrown restorations due to the difficulty faced in removal and retrieval, the use of laser is an alternative, effective and conservative method.
Zahran M, El Mowafy O, Tam L, Watson P, Finer Y. Fracture strength and fatigue resistance of all ceramic molar crowns manufactured with CAD/CAM technology. J Prosthodont. 2008;17(5):370-137.
Schwartz R, Robbins J. Post Placement and Restoration of Endodontically Treated Teeth: A Literature Review. Journal of Endodontics. 2004;30(5):289-301.
Ree M, Schwartz RS. The Endo-Restorative Interface: Current Concepts. Dental Clinics of North America. 2010;54(2): 345–374.
Pissis P. Fabrication of a metal free ceramic restoration utilizing the monobloc technique. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1995;7:83-94.
Blindl A, Mormann W. Clinical evaluation of adhesively placed cerec endocrowns after two years. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:255-265.
Kojima K, Inamoto K, Nagamatsu K, Hara A, Nakata K, Morita I, et al. Success rate of endodontic treatment of teeth with vital and nonvital pulps. A meta-analysis. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2004;97(1):95-99.
McCullock A. Dental Demolition. Dent Update 1992;19(6):255- 256,258-262.
Feldon PJ, Murray PE, Burch JG, Meister M, Freedman MA. Diode laser debonding of ceramic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2010;138(4):458-462.
Tocchio RM, Williams PT, Mayer FJ, Standing KG. Laser debonding of ceramic orthodontic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1993;103(2):155–162.
Oztoprak MO, Tozlu M, Iseri U, Ulkur F, Arun T. Effects of different application durations of scanning laser method on debonding strength of laminate veneers. Lasers in Medical Science. 2011Dec;27(4):713-716.
Ozkurt Z, Kazazoglu E, Arun T, Iseri U, Oztoprak M. Effect of Er:YAG laser on debonding strength of laminate veneers. European Journal of Dentistry. 2014;8(1):58.
Zicari F, Meerbeek BV, Scotti R, Naert I. Effect of fiber post length and adhesive strategy on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth after fatigue loading. Journal of Dentistry. 2012;40(4):312-321.
Hatta M, Shinya A, Vallittu PK, Shinya A, Lassila LV. High volume individual fibre post versus low volume fibre post: The fracture load of the restored tooth. Journal of Dentistry. 2011;39(1):65-71.
Cecchin D, Farina A, Guerreiro C, Carlini B. Fracture resistance of roots prosthetically restored with intra-radicular posts of different lengths. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2010;37(2):116-122.
Aktas G, Yerlikaya H, Akca K. Mechanical Failure of Endocrowns Manufactured with Different Ceramic Materials: An In Vitro Biomechanical Study. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2016;27(4):340-346.
Rocca G, Daher R, Saratti C, Sedlacek R, Suchy T, Feilzer A, et al. Restoration of severely damaged endodontically treated premolars: The influence of the endo-core length on marginal integrity and fatigue resistance of lithium disilicate CAD-CAM ceramic endocrowns. Journal of Dentistry. 2018;68:41-50.
Abduo J, Lyons K. Rationale for the Use of CAD/CAM Technology in Implant Prosthodontics. International Journal of Dentistry. 2013;2013:1-8.
Mclean JW, Von F. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. British Dental Journal. 1971;131(3):107-111.
Wilson PR. Effect of increasing cement space on cementation of artificial crowns. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1994;71(6):560-564.
Karimipour-Saryazdi M, Sadid-Zadeh R, Givan D, Burgess JO, Ramp LC, Liu P-R. Influence of surface treatment of yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconium oxides and cement type on crown retention after artificial aging. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2014;111(5):395-403.
Peumans M, Voet M, Munck JD, Landuyt KV, Ende AV, Meerbeek BV. Four-year clinical evaluation of a self-adhesive luting agent for ceramic inlays. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2012;17(3):739-750.
Szesz A, Parreiras S, Reis A, Loguercio A. Selective enamel etching in cervical lesions for self-etch adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2016;53:1-11.
Fleming GJP, Addison O. Adhesive Cementation and the Strengthening of All-Ceramic Dental Restorations. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology. 2009;23(7-8): 945-959.
Stangel I, Nathanson D, Hsu C. Shear Strength of the Composite Bond to Etched Porcelain. Journal of Dental Research. 1987;66(9):1460-1465.
Matinlinna J, Lassila L, Vallittu P. Evaluation of five dental silanes on bonding a luting cement onto silica-coated titanium. Journal of Dentistry. 2006;34(9):721-726.
Wigdor H. Basic Physics of Laser Interaction with Vital Tissue. Alpha Omegan. 2008;101(3):127-132.
Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Crispin BJ. Dental luting agents: A review of the current literature. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1998;80(3):280-301.
Gurney ML, Sharples SD, Phillips WB, Lee DJ. Using an ErCr: YSGG laser to remove lithium disilicate restorations: A pilot study. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2016;115(1):90-94.
Rechmann P, Buu NC, Rechmann BM, Finzen FC. Laser all-ceramic crown removal-a laboratory proof-of-principle study-Phase 2 crown debonding time. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2014;46(8):636-643.
Pashley DH, Sano H, Ciucchi B, Yoshiyama M, Carvalho RM. Adhesion testing of dentin bonding agents: A review. Dental Materials. 1995;11(2):117-125.
Buu N, Morford C, Finzen F, Sharma A, Rechmann P. Er:YAG laser debonding of porcelain veneers. Lasers in Dentistry XVI. 2010Nov.