Effect of sintering programs and surface treatments on monolithic zirconia

Dokuzlu S. N., Subaşı M. G.

Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, vol.16, no.1, pp.25-37, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 16 Issue: 1
  • Publication Date: 2024
  • Doi Number: 10.4047/jap.2024.16.1.25
  • Journal Name: Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.25-37
  • Keywords: Aging, Flexural strength, Scanning electron microscopy, Surface properties, Zirconia
  • Kütahya Health Sciences University Affiliated: Yes


PURPOSE. To investigate the effect of sintering programs and surface treatments on surface properties, phase transformation and flexural strength of monolithic zirconia. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Zirconia specimens were sintered using three distinct sintering programs [classic (C), speed (S), and superspeed (SS)] (n = 56, each). One sample from each group underwent scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and grain size analysis following sintering. Remaining samples were divided into five subgroups (n = 11) based on the surface treatments: control (CL), polish (P), glaze (G), grind + polish (GP), and grind + glaze (GG). One sample from each subgroup underwent SEM analysis. Remaining samples were thermally aged. Monoclinic phase volume, surface roughness, and three-point flexural strength were measured. Monoclinic phase volume and surface roughness were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests. Flexural strength was analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Weibull analysis. The relationships among the groups were analyzed using Spearman’s correlation analysis. RESULTS. Sintering program, surface treatment, and sintering X surface treatment (P <. 010) affected the monoclinic phase volume, whereas the type of surface treatment and sintering X surface treatment affected the surface roughness P(<. 001). Type of sintering program or surface treatment did not affect the flexural strength. Weibull analysis revealed no significant differences between the m and oo values. Monoclinic phase volume was positively correlated with surface roughness in the SGG and SSP groups. CONCLUSION. After sintering monolithic zirconia in each of the three sintering programs, each of the surface treatments can be used. However, for surface quality and aging resistance, G or GG can be recommended as a surface finishing method. [J Adv Prosthodont 2024;16:25-37]