By Peter Schouten, Technical Manager Kuraray Europe Benelux

CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 is the composite that allows intuitive creation of natural-looking restorations. The combination of its self-adaptive capacity, thanks to the use of light diffusion technology, its natural fluorescence, high filler content, fine workability and exceptional polishability provide outstanding aesthetic results.

CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 is a forgiving composite. It blends seamlessly with the adjacent tooth structure. This is because CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 incorporates light diffusing technology. This makes it possible to cover the entire VITA range using only VITA A shades.

In our endeavors to reproduce nature, we need to step away from the notion that artificial materials do all the work for us. Especially enamel is a difficult kind of tissue to replace with artificial materials like composite. When you replace natural enamel with translucent composite you almost never reach the desired goal! Why is this? The most determinant factor is the difference in value. Natural enamel increases in value in proportion to its thickness, while for (translucent) composite the value decreases.

In certain situations, for instance for the reproduction of the incisal edge of a central incisor, where a translucent zone is naturally present, the use of a more or less translucent composite is needed. However, it is often the opacity of a composite that we wish to harness in order to cover up underlying (irregular) discoloration. To do this, the use of a translucent composite is clearly not desirable. In this situation, the most opaque variant is your first choice of composite.

You've probably been there: applying anatomical layering techniques with a composite system, only to arrive at a somewhat disappointing result that looks too gray. This can be explained by the fact that, as a manufacturer - and we're certainly not alone here - we have created some confusion by giving composites names such as Dentin and, worse still, Enamel. These names suggest that these materials can be used as a replacement for natural dental tissue. Due to the totally different optical properties of each dental tissue and composite, this can only be achieved within a frequently too narrow spectrum. Therefore, when it comes to the use of the more translucent composite variants, I recommend a cautious approach. Only use such variants where transparency is required.

...it is often the opacity of a composite that we wish to harness in order to cover up underlying (irregular) discoloration. To do this, the use of a translucent composite is clearly not desirable. In this situation, the most opaque variant is your first choice of composite.

Kuraray Noritake Dental offers three basic opacities within the CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ family. These three variants enable you to create transparency where necessary, or indeed to avoid it in zones where greater coverage is required. The most opaque variant within the CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 family is Premium Dentin. The semi-opaque variant Classic and the semi-translucent variant Premium Enamel.

The challenging class IV restoration as an example. The tendency exists to use dentin composite up to the dentin-enamel junction. Don't do this, but instead apply it right up to the outermost edge of the restoration. This means also covering the beveled enamel. Depending on the desired end result, you should only use the more translucent variants, Classic or Premium Enamel, in the incisal third.

Working with different variants of CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 in one restoration where more than one variant end at the surface the transition from one type to the other is totally seamless. Since all three variants have virtually the same high filler percentages and filler type. During finishing you won't even notice the transition between the different variants. The polishability of all the variants is also identical.

All these qualities make CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 your aesthetic composite for the effortless creation of natural-looking restorations. Both anterior and posterior.

In this interview, Dr Adham Elsayed, certified specialist in dental prosthodontics and implants and clinical and scientific manager at Kuraray Noritake Dental, details the benefits of the company’s new CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal composite and explains its application in the daily dental workflow.

Though dentists are becoming increasingly specialised, there’s a growing demand for products that can be used for all indications. How does CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal fit this model?

First, we need to explain the meaning of the term ‘universal’ in this context. Previously, there have been two types of composites that differ according to the area of application: anterior composites, used in Class III, IV and V restorations where the aesthetic outcome is the priority, and posterior composites, in which the mechanical properties like strength and wear rate are more important. Universal composites, then, are those that can be used for all types of restorations in the anterior as well as the posterior region.

Another way in which ‘universal’ can be considered is in relation to shade. In this case, the term is used to describe a restorative composite system that exists in fewer shades, one that can adapt to the tooth structure independent of the colour of the tooth. A major benefit of this type of composites is that it offers a simplified workflow.

CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal is essentially universal in both meanings: it is one system that can be used for posterior and anterior restorations, and it is also provided in only three shades—one for posterior, and two for anterior.

Universal products, whether they are luting cements, bonding agents or composites, are attractive to dentists as long as they offer simplification of the treatment procedure without compromising quality and durability.

How does CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal build upon the success of the CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ range?

The CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ family is very well established at this stage. It includes such products as CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ Posterior, one of the most popular posterior composites owing to its superior mechanical properties and minimal polymerisation shrinkage. CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 is an extensive system that is highly beneficial thanks to its outstanding optical properties and ability to produce high-end aesthetics in the anterior region using Kuraray Noritake Dental’s multilayering technique. The three flowable alternatives of CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow, with different consistencies, are also other successful members of the family.

Kuraray Noritake Dental now continues the success story of CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ with the latest innovative product that can change the definition of the universal composite. CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal incorporates several attributes from the well-established ES-2 and ES Flow, including Kuraray Noritake Dental’s light diffusion technology (LDT).

Speaking of LDT—how does this technology benefit the composite?

LDT allows the material to scatter and reflect light rays at many different angles, which, in turn, allows the composite restoration to diffuse light in a similar way to the surrounding tooth structure. Hence, it eliminates aesthetic problems like the visibility of restoration and preparation borders. Thanks to innovative LDT, optimal particle fillers and opacity, CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal blends seamlessly with the surrounding tooth structure and emulates natural teeth, eliminating the need for shade selection.

As you mentioned, CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal comes with one shade for posterior restorations and two for anterior restorations. Can such a reduced shade range still truly deliver aesthetic restorations?

CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES-2 Universal is not the first composite on the market with a reduced shade system. However, we can safely say that it is the first to focus on aesthetics and not just on reducing the number of shades.

We know from experience that using one-shade composite systems in the anterior region mostly leads to unsatisfying aesthetic results, even with the use of an opaquer composite to reduce shade-matching interference. This is due to the fact that trying to provide one shade for all posterior and anterior restorations, and for all tooth shades, compromises the aesthetic to a high extent. In other words, using a highly translucent material to try to match all restorations and shades will result in the interference of other objects in the mouth, such as the tongue, gingivae and so on.

Kuraray Noritake understood this fact well and solved the problem by introducing three shades with translucencies designed to match specific indications. It is important to note the simplicity of the workflow, since only one syringe per restoration is required. This makes CLEARFIL Majesty™ ES-2 Universal a true game-changer, as it provides the perfect match between simplicity and aesthetics.

What other advantages does this new composite deliver?

Other advantages include the superior mechanical properties for which the CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ family is already known, such as favourable wear properties, low shrinkage stress and high strength. It can be polished easily and retains its gloss. Moreover, the handling of the material is a huge advantage: this includes a long working time of about 270 seconds under ambient light. It is non-sticky and can be sculpted easily.

Which dental professionals would benefit most from this product?

The perfect match between simplicity and aesthetics offers the clinician several benefits. It delivers a very straightforward time-saving procedure without compromising aesthetic results. There is no need for exact shade selection, thereby excluding visible errors of non-matching shades, and there is also a reduced amount of material stock needed. Therefore, in my opinion, this should be the product of choice for most cases in everyday practice.

Advances and developments in dental materials are rapidly accelerating, and clinicians should integrate these innovations and make their daily practice more efficient with simplified workflows, time-saving procedures, fewer material selections and, accordingly, less technique sensitivity and less need for dental practice personnel to become acquainted with an abundance of materials.

No shade taking needed. Just one shade to cover all posterior cases. Even the larger Class I's and II's!

Anterior cases from B1 to C4 done with only two shades, without the need for shade taking. Can you imagine? No additional opake materials (light blockers) needed too.

A guideline with regard to contemporary materials

The retention of the fixed prosthodontic restorations is a critical factor for the long-term success, as the loss of crown retention is one of the main reasons for failure of crowns and fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) ^{(1, 2)}. There are three main elements that need to be considered to achieve proper retention of the restorations; the tooth preparation, the restorative material and the luting agent.

TOOTH PREPARATION

During tooth preparation there are some important features to be considered, such as the height, angle and surface texture of the abutment tooth, in order to achieve an adequate retention and resistance form which provide stability of the restorations to resist dislodgment and subsequent loss ⁽³⁾. Retention form is responsible for counteracting tensile stresses, whereas resistance form counteracts shear stresses ⁽⁴⁾.

In order to achieve a sufficient retention and resistance form for full coverage crowns it is recommended that the height of the abutment tooth should be at least 4 mm and that the optimal convergence angle should range from 6 to 12 degrees with a maximum of 15 degrees ^{(1, 5-8)}.

RESTORATIVE MATERIAL

With the continuous introduction of new restorative materials to the dental market it is important to take into consideration the different mechanical properties of the various materials. The composition and the surface properties of the material have a decisive role in the ability to accomplish mechanical and/or chemical attachment to the restoration and therefore achieving required retention.

LUTING AGENT

The luting agent is the connection between the tooth and the restoration. Proper luting of indirect restoration is critical in achieving long-term success as it highly influences the retention of the restoration as well as tightly sealing the gap between the restoration and the tooth. Although there are several classifications for the definitive luting agents, they can be , however, classified into two main categories based on the ability to achieve chemical connection to different substrates; conventional (e.g. zinc phosphate, glass-ionomer and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements) and adhesives. Most commonly used and best documented adhesive luting agents are the adhesive composite resin cements.

Composite resin cements can be further classified according to the chemical composition into traditional full-adhesive resin cement and self-adhesive resin cements, both also differ in the bonding procedure. The full-adhesive resin cements require pre-treatment of the tooth structure and restorative material using separate adhesive systems. In this combination of the resin cement and the adhesive system, very durable chemical bonding can be reached.

To simplify the luting procedure and eliminate the need of using several components, the self-adhesive resin cements are a good choice for the daily busy practice, in which reliable bonding can be achieved in only one simple step of cement application, mostly without additional primers or bonding agents.

With the availability of different types of cements, the decision of choosing the suitable luting agent and method can be confusing for the practitioner. Especially with the wide use of contemporary restorative materials such as new generations of highly translucent zirconia as well as reinforced-composites, it is important to take into consideration that the properties of such materials differ highly from metal or earlier generations of zirconia. Subsequently the choice of the luting agent must be appropriate to achieve satisfying results and long-term success. Therefore, in this article, the authors aim to provide insights for the clinicians on choosing the correct luting agent that can help achieve satisfactory results for the dentist as well as the patients.

CONVENTIONAL CEMENTATION OR ADHESIVE LUTING?

The choice of whether to use a conventional cement or an adhesive resin cement depends on several factors, the key factors are:

1. Retention and resistance form of the abutment tooth.
2. Mechanical and optical properties of the restorative material (flexural strength and translucency).
3. Simplicity of the workflow and special requirements of the working environment.

1) RETENTION AND RESISTANCE FORM OF THE ABUTMENT TOOTH

Minimal-invasive restorations, such as resin-bonded FDP, labial and occlusal veneers and inlay-retained FDP are based on a non-retentive preparation form. In this case the only possible method to achieve retention is the adhesive luting ^(9-11).

Even though such preparations completely lack a retentive form, long-term success of the restorations is well-documented when using a durable resin cement (e.g. PANAVIA™ 21, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc., Japan) and proper bonding procedure ^{(10, 11)}.

For full-coverage restorations (e.g. crowns and FDPs), the guidelines for tooth preparation discussed before (minimum height of 4 mm and maximum convergence of 15 degrees) need to be applied in order to achieve the retention and resistance form required to make cementation with a conventional luting agent acceptable.

However, in reality this retention form is hard to realize due to several factors.

In cases of severe loss of tooth substance, achieving a minimum height of the abutment tooth is only possible with building up the tooth using a core build-up material which in some cases can be considered time consuming especially when the required build-up is minor (for example 1-2 mm). Moreover, increasing the height through core build-up is sometimes not possible, as in cases with short clinical crowns and insufficient occlusal clearance that is essential to provide the minimum thickness required for the restorative material. In such cases surgical crown lengthening is necessary to increase the height of the tooth without compromising the occlusal space required, which can be time consuming for the clinician and undesirable for the patient as it involves a surgical procedure and extends the treatment process.

Concerning the convergence angle, several studies showed that in reality and in daily practice of the dentist, the preparation angle is much higher than 15 degrees ^{(5, 6, 12, 13)}. For instance, preparations from general practitioners were evaluated digitally and compared to clinical recommendations and it was found that the mean convergence angle was 26.7 degree with the distopalatal angle being 31.7 degree ⁽¹²⁾.

Based on the previous concerns, it can be concluded that achieving a proper retention form during daily practice is hard to realize and thus conventional cementation in such cases can present clinical problems especially on the long term. Therefore, adhesive luting can be recommended in these cases as an alternative to conventional cementation ^{(6, 14)}. For full-coverage restorations with preparation designs featuring at least some mechanical retention, the use of self-adhesive resin cements can be considerate a good alternative as it provides high clinical success rates ^{(9, 15)}.

Conclusion / Clinical Significance:

• For non-retentive minimal-invasive restorations, traditional full-adhesive luting is a must.
• For full-coverage restorations, full-adhesive or self-adhesive luting is recommended.
• In case a retentive preparation with minimum height of 4mm and convergence angle of 6-12 degrees, adhesive luting as well as conventional cementation can be used.

2) MECHANICAL AND OPTICAL PROPERTIES OF THE RESTORATIVE MATERIAL

Flexural strength and translucency of the restorative material are critical factors that influence the decision which luting agent to use.

a) Flexural strength

As a general guideline for all-ceramic restorations, ceramics with low and medium flexural strength under 350 MPa should be adhesively luted with composite resin cements, as these restorations rely on resin bonding for reinforcement and support ^{(9, 14, 16)}. This includes feldspathic-, glass-, hybrid-ceramics and composite.

Although discussions on conventional cementation versus adhesive luting for high-strength ceramics with flexure strength of more than 350 MPa have been going on for a long time ⁽⁹⁾, there are several studies showing an increased stability and strength of all types of ceramics, even lithium disilicate and zirconia, when they are adhesively luted ^{(9, 17-20)}.

It is also important to consider that the documented success of most conventional cements is mainly combined with restorations made of metal or early generations of zirconia. Nonetheless, the clinical success of new generations of high-translucent zirconia can be significantly influenced by the luting agent as these new generations have notably lower flexural strength ⁽⁹⁾. And therefore, attention has to be paid to minimal material thickness together with adhesive luting to ensure long-term clinical success and prevent fractures ⁽⁹⁾.

Conclusion / Clinical Significance:

• For glass-ceramic, hybrid-ceramics and composites, adhesive luting is a must.
• For lithium disilicate and zirconia restorations, adhesive luting is highly recommended.
• For metal restorations, adhesive luting as well as conventional cementation can be used.

b) Translucency

To meet the increasing esthetic demands of the patients, new materials and techniques are continuously introduced, aiming to provide the perfect esthetic restorations. This includes not only new restorative materials but also new modifications to the luting agents as well. Highly translucent ceramics can deliver superior esthetics and therefore their popularity and clinical applications expanded widely among clinicians. It is nevertheless very important for the clinician to apprehend that the final esthetic result is influenced by the complete restorative complex and not just by the restorative material, as the luting agent is a key factor in achieving the desired high esthetics ^(21-24).

For that reason, the choice of an opaque conventional cement for cementation of high-translucent restoration should not be recommended as it can negatively influence the final esthetic results. Therefore, composite resin cements are the material of choice, as they are available in different shades and translucencies for the clinician to be able to choose the suitable resin cement to achieve the desired esthetics based on the restorative material and thickness as well as the color of the underlying abutment. Some composite resin cements offer try-in paste so that the clinician and the patient can visualize the final results before luting and therefore better choose the appropriate shade of the resin cement.

Conclusion / Clinical Significance:

• For all translucent ceramic restorations, adhesive luting is highly recommended.
• For metal and opaque high-strength zirconia restorations, adhesive luting as well as conventional cementation can be used.

3) SIMPLICITY OF THE WORKFLOW AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE WORKING ENVIRONMENT

The process of adhesive luting with full-adhesive composite resin cements (e.g. PANAVIA™ V5, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) requires separate etching and priming procedures usually using a self-etch adhesive system (e.g. PANAVIA™ V5 Tooth Primer, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) as well as a primer for the restorative material such as a universal primer that can be used for different substrates including metal, ceramics and composites (e.g. CLEARFIL™ CERAMIC PRIMER PLUS, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.). These procedures are technique sensitive and intolerant to contaminations, therefore the luting process needs a dry oral environment avoiding any contamination, such as saliva or blood, preferably using rubber dam, as any contamination can compromise the bond strength. Therefore, inability to maintain dry field as in case of subgingival preparation margins is considered a contraindication for traditional full-adhesive luting. However, this method provides very durable bond strength, therefore it is the luting method of choice for minimal invasive non-retentive preparations, such as resin-bonded FDPs, labial and occlusal veneers and inlay-retained FDPs, in which the retention is mainly dependent on the adhesion ^(9-11).

Still, in everyday practice, clinicians seek efficiency and effectivity by using a simple but durable luting agent for the insertion of full-coverage restorations such as tooth-or implant-supported crowns and FDPs. Although the conventional cements are simple and fast in their use, they provide little or no adhesion at all and therefore they are not recommended in several cases ^{(6, 9, 14, 15, 19, 20)}. A simple but reliable method can be well accomplished by the use of self-adhesive resin cements (e.g. PANAVIA™ SA Cement Universal, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) as they can be considered the best alternative for full-adhesive adhesive luting in less critical situations that do not rely entirely on adhesion ^{(9, 15)}. Furthermore, self-adhesive resin cements are not as technique sensitive and intolerant to contaminations as traditional full-adhesive resin cements.

Typically, a MDP phosphate monomer is integrated in the self-adhesive resin cement, which is required to chemically bond to different substrates, making it possible for the resin cement to chemically bond to non-precious metals and zirconia as well as tooth substance. However, regardless of the self-adhesive resin cement, the use of a separate silane coupling agent is still required when bonding to silica-based ceramics (e.g. leucite, lithium silicate and lithium disilicate), hybrid ceramics and composite restorations.

Recently, a unique self-adhesive resin cement (PANAVIA™ SA Cement Universal, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) was introduced: through an innovative and distinctive production technology, a silane-coupling agent (long carbon chain silane (LCSi)) is integrated in the cement, and thus being the real universal adhesive system that completely eliminate the need for any other adhesive or primer when being used for all substrates including glass ceramics. So the luting process can be in this case truly shortened to one step.

Therefore, this unique cement combines several advantages of adhesive luting as well as the straightforward procedure of the conventional cementation without compromising the clinical success, regardless of the type of the restorative material.

As a conclusion, adhesive luting has more benefits over conventional cementation, regarding retention, esthetics, stabilization of the tooth and the restoration as well as preventing micro leakage ^{(6, 9, 14-17, 19, 20, 25, 26)} (Table 1). Moreover, there are no absolute contraindications for adhesive luting other than hypersensitivity to methacrylate monomers, as self-adhesive resin cements can be used in cases where full-adhesive resin cements are contraindicated, such as inability to avoid contamination (Table 2). As a result, adhesive luting can be generally used in every clinical situation, whereas conventional cementation is limited (Table 3).

Dentist(s):

Prof. Dr. Florian Beuer
Professor and Chair, Department of Prosthodontics, Geriatric Dentistry and Craniomandibular Disorders, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.

Dr. Adham Elsayed
Clinical and Scientific manager, Kuraray Europe GmbH, Hattersheim, Germany.

References

1. Ladha K, Verma M. Conventional and contemporary luting cements: an overview. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2010;10(2):79-88.
2. Schwartz NL, Whitsett LD, Berry TG, Stewart JL. Unserviceable crowns and fixed partial dentures: life-span and causes for loss of serviceability. J Am Dent Assoc. 1970;81(6):1395-401.
3. Gilboe DB, Teteruck WR. Fundamentals of extracoronal tooth preparation. Part I. Retention and resistance form. J Prosthet Dent. 1974;32(6):651-6.
4. Muruppel AM, Thomas J, Saratchandran S, Nair D, Gladstone S, Rajeev MM. Assessment of Retention and Resistance Form of Tooth Preparations for All Ceramic Restorations using Digital Imaging Technique. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2018;19(2):143-9.
5. Edelhoff D, Özcan M. To what extent does the longevity of fixed dental prostheses depend on the function of the cement? Working Group 4 materials: cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18 Suppl 3:193-204.
6. Güth JF, Stawarczyk B, Edelhoff D, Liebermann A. Zirconia and its novel compositions: What do clinicians need to know? Quintessence Int. 2019;50(7):512-20.
7. Smith CT, Gary JJ, Conkin JE, Franks HL. Effective taper criterion for the full veneer crown preparation in preclinical prosthodontics. J Prosthodont. 1999;8(3):196-200.
8. Uy JN, Neo JC, Chan SH. The effect of tooth and foundation restoration heights on the load fatigue performance of cast crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;104(5):318-24.
9. Blatz MB, Vonderheide M, Conejo J. The Effect of Resin Bonding on Long-Term Success of High-Strength Ceramics. J Dent Res. 2018;97(2):132-9.
10. Chaar MS, Kern M. Five-year clinical outcome of posterior zirconia ceramic inlay-retained FDPs with a modified design. J Dent. 2015;43(12):1411-5.
11. Kern M, Passia N, Sasse M, Yazigi C. Ten-year outcome of zirconia ceramic cantilever resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses and the influence of the reasons for missing incisors. J Dent. 2017;65:51-5.
12. Guth JF, Wallbach J, Stimmelmayr M, Gernet W, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Computer-aided evaluation of preparations for CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(5):1389-95.
13. Nordlander J, Weir D, Stoffer W, Ochi S. The taper of clinical preparations for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 1988;60(2):148-51.
14. Blatz MB. Long-term clinical success of all-ceramic posterior restorations. Quintessence Int. 2002;33(6):415-26.
15. Blatz MB, Phark JH, Ozer F, Mante FK, Saleh N, Bergler M, et al. In vitro comparative bond strength of contemporary self-adhesive resin cements to zirconium oxide ceramic with and without air-particle abrasion. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14(2):187-92.
16. Kern M, Thompson VP, Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Frankenberger R, Kohal RJ, et al. All ceramics at a glance. 3rd English Edition ed: AG Keramik; 2017.
17. Attia A, Abdelaziz KM, Freitag S, Kern M. Fracture load of composite resin and feldspathic all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;95(2):117-23.
18. Borges GA, Caldas D, Taskonak B, Yan J, Sobrinho LC, de Oliveira WJ. Fracture loads of all-ceramic crowns under wet and dry fatigue conditions. J Prosthodont. 2009;18(8):649-55.
19. Campos F, Valandro LF, Feitosa SA, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ, de Jager N, et al. Adhesive Cementation Promotes Higher Fatigue Resistance to Zirconia Crowns. Oper Dent. 2017;42(2):215-24.
20. Weigl P, Sander A, Wu Y, Felber R, Lauer HC, Rosentritt M. In-vitro performance and fracture strength of thin monolithic zirconia crowns. J Adv Prosthodont. 2018;10(2):79-84.
21. Calgaro PA, Furuse AY, Correr GM, Ornaghi BP, Gonzaga CC. Post-cementation colorimetric evaluation of the interaction between the thickness of ceramic veneers and the shade of resin cement. Am J Dent. 2014;27(4):191-4.
22. Chang J, Da Silva JD, Sakai M, Kristiansen J, Ishikawa-Nagai S. The optical effect of composite luting cement on all ceramic crowns. J Dent. 2009;37(12):937-43.
23. Turgut S, Bagis B. Effect of resin cement and ceramic thickness on final color of laminate veneers: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(3):179-86.
24. Volpato CA, Monteiro S, Jr., de Andrada MC, Fredel MC, Petter CO. Optical influence of the type of illuminant, substrates and thickness of ceramic materials. Dent Mater. 2009;25(1):87-93.
25. Al-Makramani BMA, Razak AAA, Abu-Hassan MI. Evaluation of load at fracture of Procera AllCeram copings using different luting cements. J Prosthodont. 2008;17(2):120-4.
26. Gu XH, Kern M. Marginal discrepancies and leakage of all-ceramic crowns: influence of luting agents and aging conditions. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16(2):109-16.

Zirconia ceramics are increasingly being used for dental prostheses. In the past, they were used as a substructure that was baked with porcelain; nowadays, monolithic zirconia prostheses have been made possible by the introduction of aesthetic zirconia ceramics varieties. They are used more and more, even as RBFDPs (Resin Bonded Fixed Dental Prosthesis).

There is currently quite a lot of discussion about zirconia. So much the better, because it keeps the dynamics of the subject alive. Is it possible to adhesively cement zirconia? Is it permissible to sandblast zirconia? Is it feasible to polish zirconia? Is wear of the antagonist an issue? And so on and so forth.

New dental technologies and materials have been developed in recent years to meet the demand for aesthetic, biocompatible and metal-free prostheses. Although porcelain has been used as an aesthetic dental material for more than hundred years, its restrictions are now well-known. It is the fragility of porcelain (low flexural strength and fracture toughness) in particular which restricts its application in areas where the exertion of massive force on the material is a factor. Zirconia has a high flexural strength and is therefore suitable for multiple dental applications.

Development

The first generation of zirconias used in dentistry belonged to the Partially Stabilised Zirconia (PSZ) class. This type of zirconia, stabilised with yttrium oxide, was composed of a mix of monoclinic, tetragonal and cubic crystals but is no longer used nowadays. The so-called Y-TZP variant was then used for many years, and still is. Its main characteristics are high flexural strength (> 1.000 MPa) and an opaque white appearance. For the most part, this variant is composed of tetragonal crystals of a few hundred nanometers. To keep the material stable at room temperature, approximately 3 mol% of yttrium oxide is added to the composition, which is why it is sometimes referred to as 3Y zirconia.

In order to improve its aesthetic properties, a start was made on the development of a new variety, so-called cubic zirconia. Cubic zirconia is characterised by a high translucence, meaning that a lower flexural strength must be accepted. Admittedly, the flexural strength of this variant is lower than that of the tetragonal variety, but still much higher than the flexural strength of lithium disilicate. It also contains more yttrium oxide; approximately 5 mol%.

Crystal phases

We currently know zirconia crystals in three varieties: monoclinic, tetragonal and cubic. In general, zirconia only exists in the monoclinic phase at room temperature. Monoclinic zirconia has low strength as well as low translucence. Tetragonal zirconia crystals are metastable and can only exist at room temperature after having been stabilised with yttrium oxide, among other metal oxides. The characteristics of tetragonal zirconia are that it is strong, but at the same time devoid of aesthetic
properties. Cubic crystals are stable and ensure improved translucence. Although prostheses made from cubic zirconia are not as strong as the tetragonal variety, they are highly aesthetic, and are even suitable for monolithic restorations in the aesthetic zones.

Multilayer

KATANA™ Zirconia ML, STML and UTML, as well as the latest KATANA™ Zirconia Block, are so-called multilayer zirconias. These products are built up of four layers with an ascending degree of translucency, ranging from the more opaque and coloured body layer (cervical), through two transitional layers, to the translucent incisal edge (occlusal/incisal). The invisible transition from one layer to another is achieved using a unique process. The secret is in the specific distribution of particles during the pre-sintered stage (continuous gap grading). In combination with the cold isostatic pressing method, this ensures material of an outstandingly high quality.

KATANA™ Zirconia Block

The use of KATANA™ Zirconia Block makes it possible to produce a complete monolithic zirconia prosthesis in a short time. This block was developed to be used within the CEREC workflow. After scanning, the prosthesis is ground for approximately 15 minutes and can then be sintered in the SpeedFire oven in just half an hour¹). KATANA™ Zirconia Block shares the properties of KATANA™ STML and can be used for the production of single-unit prostheses such as full crowns for both anterior and posterior applications.

Wear of the antagonist

The question of whether zirconia prostheses are harmful to the antagonist would seem to be justified; after all, this is a very hard material. Hardness, however, does not relate directly to the abrasive properties of a material. Smoothly polished zirconia is minimally abrasive, something which has been corroborated by multiple studies²). Glaze, porcelain, lithium disilicate and even enamel are all more abrasive for the antagonist.

CAD/CAM

Thanks to emerging digital solutions (CAD/CAM) combined with the possibility of executing fixed partial dentures (FPDs) in monolithic zirconia, a fully digital workflow - from scan to prosthesis - is now feasible.

Sandblasting

Sandblasting using alumina is the standard method for the roughening of zirconia. In order to reduce the decline from the tetragonal crystal stage to the monoclinic stage, it is recommended that sandblasting be carried out at a maximum pressure of 2.5 bar using 50 micron aluminium oxide particles as a maximum³). In practice, zirconia is also frequently sandblasted tribochemically, for example, by means of CoJet (3M). The results achieved with this method are variable. In the case of limited pressure (2.5 bar as a maximum) there is a risk that the energy will be insufficient to achieve an effective and complete fusion between the silica and the zirconia surface. It is therefore recommended that CLEARFIL™ Ceramic Primer Plus be used for adhesive connection with the sandblasted surface. The silane in this ceramic primer bonds chemically with the silica, while the MDP bonds with the areas of zirconia not covered by silica. The use of silane alone does not provide an adequate basis for a reliable result⁴). Sandblasting with alumina, however, followed by priming with CLEARFIL™ Ceramic Primer Plus, is a well-proven and reliable method to ensure effective bonding to zirconia⁵).

Not etchable, but certainly bondable

Zirconia is not – or is barely – etchable with the etching technology available (HF). In addition, it cannot be recommended that zirconia be treated with phosphoric acid, because of the bonding of phosphates to the surface of the zirconia, which will inhibit a chemical activation of the surface for some adhesive cementation systems. The question of whether an etching product should be used is a valid one; after all, chemical etching is not necessary to achieve surface roughness. Achieving surface roughness is, however, a logical option, and roughening by means of sandblasting would seem to be the most appropriate method for zirconia. Thereafter, chemical bonding is ensured using a phosphoric functional monomer, preferably MDP.

Adhesion principles

Three basic factors are required to achieve the effective bonding of different materials. In keeping with the principles of adhesion, these are: surface enlargement (micromechanical retention), chemical activity (adsorption and electrostatic bonding) and a high-energetic surface to guarantee proper adaptation.

Adhesive bonding

The best method of adhesive bonding for zirconia is the use of a composite cement containing MDP. Professor Mathias Kern published an article about bonding to zirconia using MDP as early as 1998. This study showed that sustainable resin bonding to zirconia can only be achieved using a composite cement with a special adhesive monomer. The monomer used was in fact MDP. In the meantime, many studies have been published about bonding to zirconia.

On the one hand, these studies concern bonding with phosphate monomers (MDP); on the other hand, attention has been paid to the modification of the zirconia surface to render it etchable. The simplest and most reliable method is to sandblast the surface at a low pressure using aluminium oxide, followed by priming with an MDP-containing primer⁶).

PETER SCHOUTEN,
Technical Manager Kuraray Europe Benelux

1) Depending on the method of grinding/milling.
2) Mörmann W.H. et al. Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: Two body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness. Journal of the mech. Behavior of Biomedical Materials 20 (2013) 113-125, Janyavula S. et al. The wear of polished and glazed zirconia against enamel. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109;22-29 Stawarczyk B. et al. Comparison of four monolithic zirconia materials with conventional ones: Contrast ratio, grain size, four-point flexural strength and two-body wear. Journal of the mech. Behavior of Biomedical Materials 59 (2016) 128-138 D’Arcangelo C. et al. Wear Evaluation of Prosthetic Materials Opposing Themselves. Oper Dent 2017 antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet dent 2009; 101: 342-349.
3) Attia A. / Kern M. Effect of cleaning methods after reduced-pressure Air Abrasion on Bonding to Zirconia Ceramic J Adhes Dent 2011; 13: 561-567.
4) Pilo R. Effect of tribochemical treatments and silane reactivity on resin bonding to zirconia. Dent Mater (2017).
5) Kern M. Bonding to oxide ceramics - Laboratory testing versus clinical outcomes. Dent Mater (2014).
6) M. Kern et al., Bonding to zirconia ceramic: adhesion methods and their durability. Dent Mater 14: 64-71, Jan.1998.

Did you know that a complete removal of temporary cement from the abutment tooth with a rubber cup and pumice paste or an ultrasonic scaler is usually impossible? In most cases, some visibly undetectable residues remain on the surface. They will negatively affect the bonding performance of the permanent cementation system you selected. KATANA™ Cleaner is our answer to this problem! Applied after conventional temporary cement removal, it provides optimal conditions for permanent cementation.

All relevant details are revealed in this scientific report.

Universal applicability of dental materials – this is a feature highly valued by the products’ users. It allows them to slim down the range of materials needed, which leads to reduced stock inventory and facilitates the establishment of universal workflows. With fewer variables and inconsistencies, all members of the practice team will know exactly what to do and how to do it, which mean less errors and consistent outcomes.

As one of the leading developers and providers of bonding agents, cements and composite filling as well as indirect restorative materials, Kuraray Noritake Dental strongly supports the universality trend in dentistry. Popular examples of universal products for direct restoration procedures are CLEARFIL™ Universal Bond Quick, a one-step dental bonding agent that works with or without a separate etching step, and the filling material CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow.

Indirect restorative workflows are streamlined e.g. with PANAVIA™ SA Cement Universal, a self-adhesive resin cement indicated for all kinds of restorative materials, which is always used according to the same universal protocol.

Prior to the use of this product, the dental practitioner should consider cleaning the tooth and the restoration with KATANA™ Cleaner indicated for extra- and intra-oral use and providing optimal conditions for a strong and durable bond.

Both products recently received very positive ratings from the evaluators of Clinician’s Report. Click here to see the evaluations!

By Marco Stoppaccioli

In today´s society, due to higher life expectancy, greater and more responsible attention to one´s body, we have developed a culture more sensitive to personal well-being. Consequently, more patients with total removable prostheses request stabilization of their prostheses through implant treatment which offers the most effective and valid response to this need.

The demand for implant treatments has increased significantly during the last decade, specifically from patients with long-term full prostheses resulting in considerable bone resorption¹, but are hesitant to undergo complex bone regeneration interventions (Photo 1).

These rehabilitations require great commitment and professional skills. In addition to restoring a complex series of aesthetic-functional parameters that have been lost. Innovative products were developed, not only the restoration of the dental, but also, the orthopedic aspects of the procedure.

Photo 1: Upper and lower Jaw situation models.

Initially, the dental-skeletal rehabilitations involved the exclusive use of metal posts combined with acrylic materials.

In recent decades, we have witnessed an evolution in the surgical techniques and materials used, among these, zirconia² has a significant and highly innovative role. The main reason for its success is due to the possibility of being able to use it anatomically through a simple and effective protocol thanks to CAD CAM technology.

Zirconia, created to be covered with ceramic coatings, has undergone a profound evolution: from an exclusively structural material with high strength but low aesthetic appeal, it has become anatomical, constituting an alternative to layered restorations. Thanks to research and innovation, optimizing chemical and physical parameters³ in the dental industry, we now have a wide range of products, including multi-layer zirconia.

In more analytical terms, it offers a very valid response to the translucency, which is inversely proportional to the flexural strength. On the market this material class oscillates between 550Mpa and 1200Mpa of flexural strength. This characteristic identifies its indication range, specifically depending on the yttrium oxide content, which acts as a stabilizer of zirconia.

For dental-skeletal rehabilitations, the protocol involves the use of multi-layer monolithic zirconia with marked characteristics of flexural strength but lower translucency which determines a limit in the aesthetic sense. On the other hand, the use of multi-layered zirconia with high translucency cannot be considered suitable, due to its lack of flexural strength, despite fully meeting the requirement for naturalness.

To date it can be said that there is no zirconia that offers high mechanical properties combined with high translucency, two fundamental aspects for successful restorations.

Considering these factors, the idea was born to generate an innovative and experimental protocol capable of supporting, on the one hand, the ability of CAD/CAM systems to copy exactly a project or even better, a functionalized provisional implant, and on the other, to associate the use of two zirconia with different characteristics: one extremely tough, white colored zirconia with 1125 MPa (KATANA™ HT Kuraray Noritake) and the other super translucent multi-layered zirconia with 750 MPa (KATANA™ STML Kuraray Noritake).

OPERATIONAL PROTOCOL

In dental-skeletal rehabilitations, success depends on a precise diagnosis by the clinician, aimed at the functional and aesthetic restoration of the case. It is a fundamental task of the dental technician to translate this information through the creation of a wax-up, both analog and digital.

Photo 2: Digital wax-up.

Photo 3: Analog wax-up.

Thanks to digitization, with a 3D printer, it is possible to realize the wax-up quickly and economically in a prototype, capable of allowing the clinician to perform an initial test in the oral cavity.

Photo 4: From design to 3D prototype.

Once the adequacy of the prototype under study has been certified, the next phase involves the construction of the provisional implant which, placed in the oral cavity for a specified time, provides the fundamental information from an occlusal point of view, both in static and dynamic conditions.

The first strength of this protocol is to capture all information about the provisional implant and transfer them to the final work through digital systems. In other words, the provisional implant itself becomes the design of the final product.

Photo 5: Temporary result of analog project.

Photo 6: Acquisition of temporary arches refitted on the models.

FINAL PROCEDURE: OPERATING PHASES

Once the scans of the temporary implant have been acquired in the digital platform, the structural frame obtained by reduction of the temporary implant file is generated. The framework will be made by using KATANA™ HT white colored zirconia (Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) with a flexural strength of 1125 MPa. This choice is attributable to an adequate toughness of the material and an effective aesthetic chromatic response on the pink ceramic coating.

Photo 7: Structural framework.

Photo 8: White zirconia framework, 1125 MPa (KATANA HT).

Once the structural file is generated, it is called up within the modeling software to create the anatomical components that will be divided into quadrants.

Photo 9: File divided into three seqments.

The selected material is multi-layered KATANA™ Zirconia STML by Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc. with a flexural strength of 750 MPa and high translucency. KATANA™ Zirconia STML shows an optimized balance between mechanical and optical characteristics.

The author's choice to divide the anatomical components into three segments has a dual purpose: the first is to have a better quality of the milling and the second is to reduce the material waste of the zirconia disc as much as possible.

Photo 10: The three segments after sintering.

Once the frameworks are obtained, before they are merged with each other, the anatomical parts are finished and polished; only the areas excluded from the functional part will be sandblasted. Special attention must be paid to the surface texturing of the anterior sectors⁵, with cutters, discs and rubbers dedicated for this purpose. The surfaces that remain shiny offer a lower abrasion coefficient than the natural tooth⁶; in fact, the abrasiveness depends on the surface smoothing. Polished zirconia has lower abrasion coefficients than lithium disilicate and layered ceramics⁷.

The adhesion between the anatomical and structural zirconia components is achieved by fusion with Noritake Cerabien ZR Low Fusion ceramic.

Photo 11: Anatomical components joined to the structural framework.

Once the adhesion between the zirconia components has been obtained, the first analog phase involves the creation of the gum parts, with dedicated pink gingival masses at a high temperature of 940 C° (CZR™ Tissue Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.). The author selects three gingival masses with which the keratinized and vascularised parts are reproduced8, peculiar to the natural gingival tissue.

Photo 12: Used CZR™ Tissue porcelain.

Photo 13: Application of CZR™ Tissue porcelain.

Once the pink gingival parts are finalized, the coloring of the anatomical components will follow with the use of dedicated low temperature stains (CZR™ FC Paste Stain, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) which, together with the high translucency of the anatomical zirconia, guarantees a high aesthetic result.

With gray, blue and black shades, it is possible to give a high degree of translucency to the incisal edges. With warm shades, like orange and yellow, the transitions of the anatomical crowns are emphasized, while with a few spots of strong color it is possible to give character and uniqueness to the teeth.

Photo 14: Used shades of CZR™ FC Paste Stain.

The low baking temperature of CZR™ FC Paste Stain guarantees the non-alteration of the gingival component. The final step involves glazing the sandblasted parts.

Photo 15: Final situation.

Photo 16: Occlusal view.

CONCLUSION

The strength of dento-skeletal rehabilitations made of monolithic zirconia, which is a stable, reliable and highly biocompatible material is, through the possibility of using CAD/CAM technology to make an exact copy of a case or, even better, a functionalized temporary implant.

Photo 17: Matching with wax-up.

The 1125 MPa zirconia is ideal for this type of prosthesis, however, does not offer an aesthetic quality. Therefore, the combination of two zirconia materials, one extremely strong and the other highly aesthetic, fully satisfies this requirement.

Photo 18, 19: Intra-oral situation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1) Matteo Chiapasco, Eugenio Romeo La riabilitazione implantoprotesica nei casi compless, UTET S.p.A. 2003 Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese.

2) Piconi C. ,Rimondini L. ,Cerroni L. , La zirconia in odontoiatria, Masson, 2008.

3) Stawarczyk B., Ozcan M., Hallmann L., Ender A., Mehl A., Hammerle CH., Effect of zirconia sintering temperature on flexural strengh, grain size and contrast ratio. Clin oral investig, 2013.

5) Shigeo Kataoka, Yoshimi Nishimura , Morfologia naturale dei denti, Edizione internazionale Milano 2003
La riabilitazione implantoprotesica nei casi compless.

6) Oh W., Delong R., Anusavice K., Factors affecting enamel and ceramic wear: A literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2002.

7) Preis V., Bher M., Kolbeck C., Hahnel S., Handel G., Rosentritt M., Wear performance of substructure ceramics and veneering porcelains, Dent Mater, 2011.

8) Rutten L. & P., L’estetica su impianti, editrice MEA, 1999.

Thanks: Dr. Fortunato Alfonsi, Odt. Raoul Pietropaolo.

Users of dental zirconia are really spoilt for choice these days. Countless manufacturers offer zirconia materials that differ in their mechanical and optical properties and indication range. What is not apparent at first sight is that the available products also differ with respect to the quality of the CAD/CAM blanks offered. Blank quality is highly dependent on the quality of the raw materials and is affected by different aspects during raw material processing, pressing and pre-sintering. This has a huge impact on the surface quality, edge stability, fit and processing requirements of milled restorations.

Raw material production

Pre-shaded dental zirconia typically consists of metal oxides, including zirconium oxide, yttrium oxide and aluminium oxide, as well as additives like binders and colour pigments or ions. Most manufacturers of dental zirconia obtain pre-fabricated powder from an external industry partner, the most popular option being Tosoh Corporation. In contrast, Kuraray Noritake Dental relies on an end-to-end in-house process. This includes the production and addition of the components forming the company’s innovative multilayered technology, which makes it possible to match the shades in the polychromatic blanks precisely to the colours of the VITA classical A1-D4 shade guide.

At Kuraray Noritake Dental, the powder is produced in-house.

Since more powder production steps are carried out in-house, this gives the company full control of the quality of the raw materials, their grain size and the purity of the formulation. It also allows for a precise alignment of the mechanical and optical product properties. Properties of zirconia restorations that are affected by the powder quality and composition include translucency and shade appearance, flexural strength, ageing behaviour and sintering performance.

Blank pressing

Zirconia discs and blocks used for CAD/CAM processing are usually produced by uniaxial and isostatic pressing. In the uniaxial compaction process, pressure is applied to the powder from one direction (uniaxial) or two directions (biaxial), whereas the isostatic compaction process involves virtually equal pressure applied from all sides. Hence, isostatic pressing typically results in a more uniform density distribution throughout the blank and a higher material homogeneity. These factors are prerequisites for a predictable processing and sintering behaviour and affect the fit of the final restoration. For optimal mechanical and optical properties of the zirconia material, it is essential to avoid large porosities, air pockets and impurities caused by airborne particles that are trapped during pressing.

At Kuraray Noritake Dental, a unique and extremely meticulous pressing process achieves a uniform pressure distribution and low risk of contamination by airborne particles. This specific procedure reduces gravitation forces and contributes to having as high as possible density of zirconia material. All the high-level preparation processes from raw material production to pressing are responsible for the high edge stability and surface quality of restorations milled from KATANA™ Zirconia.”

Pre-sintering

The pre-sintering procedure is necessary in that it gives the pressed blanks the required stability to be machinable with milling tools. The selected temperature profile and duration of the pre-sintering cycle determine the material’s strength and processing properties and have an impact on the final sintering process.

The unique pre-sintering procedure carried out in the production facilities of Kuraray Noritake Dental results in blanks that are stable in their pre-sintered state. Although more stable, pre-sintered KATANA™ Zirconia is machinable with common diamond-coated milling tools without any increased risk of breakage or higher tool wear.

A KATANA™ Zirconia blank ready for milling.

Fast sintering for the laboratory

The unique procedure has a positive impact on the surface smoothness after milling and can significantly shorten sintering times. In fact, the speed sintering program offered for all variants of KATANA™ Zirconia is the fastest one on the market. In the dental laboratory, the sintering times may be reduced to 90 minutes^*for single-tooth restorations and bridges of up to three units.

^*The material is removed from the furnace at 800°C.

Overview of the recommended sintering protocols.

Fast sintering for chairside

Using the KATANA™ Zirconia block with Dentsply Sirona’s CEREC system, it is possible to sinter single crowns up to three-unit bridges in 18-30 minutes without compromising the mechanical or optical properties.

The KATANA™ Zirconia block displays superior optical properties after 18 minutes of sintering compared with representatives of major competitors’ raw material after 30-minute and 60-minute sintering programs designed by Kuraray Noritake Dental based on the manufacturer's recommendations.

Unique KATANA™ Zirconia properties

Together, these efforts taken by Kuraray Noritake Dental to produce dental zirconia of exceptionally high quality make all the difference. The KATANA™ Zirconia series - KATANA™ Zirconia Ultra Translucent Multi Layered (UTML), Super Translucent Multi Layered (STML), High Translucent Multi Layered (HTML) and KATANA™ Zirconia High Translucent Mono Layered (HT) - have a homogeneous, high-density structure with low porosity and a high level of purity. This optimises the performance of the blanks during machining.

Surface roughness

SEM image, magnification 33X, of competitor material surface roughness. Image courtesy of Dr Kunkela, Kunkela Research Academy.

SEM image, magnification 33X, of KATANA Zirconia surface roughness. Image courtesy of Dr Kunkela, Kunkela Research Academy.

SEM images of non-polished KATANA™ Zirconia and a competitor’s material at 33x magnification. The four images of each material show the surface structure at different areas of a molar crown. In all areas, the surface of the restoration made of the competitor’s material is rougher and shows more porosity than the surface of the KATANA™ Zirconia crown directly after milling, according to Dr Josef Kunkela’s research results. One of the contributing factors to this result is the more densely pressed blanks with smaller grain sizes of KATANA™ Zirconia.

An optimised processing behaviour leads to regular restoration margins, smooth surfaces and a precise fit of the restorations. The latter is due to the fact that the milling behaviour and volumetric shrinkage during final sintering are highly predictable, so that a user designing a 20 µm cement gap will get what he or she desires. Owing to the great control over optical properties and precise match to the VITA classical A1-D4 shades, KATANA™ Zirconia is considered to be one of the most aesthetic dental zirconia options available on the market.

Excellent marginal fit

SEM images revealing the fit of restorations made of two different materials (lithium disilicate and KATANA™ Zirconia Block STML) on a tooth abutment. The KATANA™ Zirconia restoration shows a more regular margin and more precise fit (with a cement gap of 19-21 µm) than the lithium disilicate crown (cement gap 26-45 µm). Images courtesy of Dr Kunkela, Kunkela Research Academy.

Extremely regular margins of a KATANA™ Zirconia crown after milling, which is also a result of the favourable material structure.

In order to ensure all the desired material properties, including aesthetics and strength, one thing is essential: the machining carried out in the dental laboratory - milling and sintering - needs to adhere to the recommended protocols. This means that the milling machine and furnace should be cleaned and calibrated on a regular basis, which provides the conditions for optimised zirconia processing from the powder to the final, true-to-life dental restoration.