Comparison of surface roughness and topography of translucent zirconia
Originally at link.springer.com
Summary & scoring by The Bell Brief (Dr. Jennifer Bell) using the Drill-Down Protocol (Drill-Down Score) — not the original publisher.
Why it matters for dental
Dental laboratories and restorative clinicians choosing between translucent zirconia and lithium disilicate now have new surface-roughness data that directly affect polishing protocols, chair-side adjustment time, and long-term wear of opposing enamel.
Key points
- Peer-reviewed comparison in BMC Oral Health quantifies how glazing, grinding, and three polishing systems alter roughness and topography on both high-translucent zirconia and lithium disilicate.
- Results allow labs and in-office technicians to select polishing sequences that minimize post-glaze roughness, reducing the need for additional chair-side refinement.
- Surface measurements provide objective guidance on which polishing system yields the smoothest finish for each ceramic, influencing both esthetic predictability and opposing-tooth wear risk.
- Findings apply to any practice or lab performing monolithic anterior or posterior restorations where surface finish is critical to clinical longevity.
Who should care
Read the original on BMC Oral Health
Full reporting and any paywall content live on link.springer.com. We summarize and score; we do not republish.
Related
- ·Regulatory
Taylor dentist faces two felony drug charges after police say he was selling meth at Canton Township home
- ·Regulatory
Is fluoride still safe for kids? A dentist breaks down what the research actually shows
- ·Regulatory
New California law requires dental insurers to pay out-of-network dentists directly
- ·Regulatory
Privacy Act of 1974; Matching Program