The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: This study tested whether the two-body wear of monolithic zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists was higher compared to monolithic alloy and veneered zirconia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cylindrical specimens (N = 36, n = 6) were prepared out of (A) veneered zirconia (VZ), (B) glazed zirconia using a glaze ceramic (GZC), (C) glazed zirconia using a glaze spray (GZS), (D) manually polished monolithic zirconia (MAZ), (E) mechanically polished monolithic zirconia (MEZ) and (F) monolithic base alloy (control group, MA). Wear tests were performed in a chewing simulator (49 N, 1.7 Hz, 5°C/50°C) with enamel antagonists. The wear analysis was performed using a 3D profilometer before and after 120,000, 240,000, 640,000 and 1,200,000 masticatory cycles. SEM images were used for evaluating wear qualitatively. The longitudinal results were analysed using linear mixed models (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Materials (p < 0.001) and number of masticatory cycles (p < 0.001) had a significant effect on the wear level. The least enamel antagonist wear was observed for MAZ and MEZ (27.3 ± 15.2, 28 ± 11.1 μm, respectively). GZC (118 ± 30.9 μm) showed the highest wear of enamel antagonists. The highest wear rate in the material was observed in GZS (91.3 ± 38.6 μm). While in the groups of MA, VZ, GZC and GZS 50% of the specimens developed cracks in enamel, it was 100% in MAZ and MEZ groups. CONCLUSION: Polished monolithic zirconia showed lower wear rate on enamel antagonists as well as within the material itself but developed higher rates of enamel cracks.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Mörmann, W. H., Stawarczyk, B., Ender, A., Sener, B., Attin, T., & Mehl, A. (2013) · Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.003 · Cited by 342
Self-citationRevolution of Current Dental Zirconia: A Comprehensive Review
Alqutaibi, A. Y., Ghulam, O., Krsoum, M., Binmahmoud, S., Taher, H., Elmalky, W., & Zafar, M. S. (2022) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules27051699 · Cited by 142
Metadata
- Authors
- Stawarczyk, B., Özcan, M., Schmutz, F., Trottmann, A., Roos, M., & Hämmerle, C. H. F.
- Venue
- Acta Odontologica Scandinavica
- Published
- 2012-02-27
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 102-112
- ISSN
- 0001-6357 (ISSN-L)
- 1502-3850
- OpenAlex
- W2005296761
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/00016357.2011.654248
- The paper
- Stawarczyk, B., Özcan, M., Schmutz, F., Trottmann, A., Roos, M., & Hämmerle, C. H. F. (2013). Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2011.654248
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.