Page 10 - CEREC Q1 | 2014

8 | CERECDOCTORS.COM | QUARTER 1 | 2014
BruxZir and e.maxCAD
under the microscope
Fig. 1: Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images
of BruxZir fabricated by Glidewell Laboratories:
(a) The smooth glazed restoration at initial placement.
(b) Small patches of glaze loss over the entire occlusal
table after 1 year of service.
(c) The glaze defects progress as time passes from year 1
to year 3. Note the patches of glaze loss occurring at the
bottom of fissures where no occlusal contact occurs.
acontrolledclinicaltrialunderwayattracresearch
in Provo, Utah, for the past three years is confirming what
CEREC users already know are the benefits of the factory-fabri-
cated monolithic blocks they mill. Superior performance clini-
cally has been attributed to the small particle size, high density
and controlled processing used in fabrication of the blocks.
Some very positive data was reported at the cerecdoctors.com
Scientific Symposium this past November. There are a number of
clinicians who volunteered to select subjects from among their
patients, placing full-contour crowns on molars and recalling the
patients yearly tocollect follow-updata. This is anever-expanding
study, which incorporates newmaterials as they become available
for milling on CEREC equipment. It now includes:
• BruxZir full contour zirconia
• e.maxCAD milled lithium disilicate processed two ways
To Glaze Or Not to Glaze?
A Three-year Informal Report on Durability Problems
With Glazes Used on e.maxCAD and BruxZir
M AT E R I A L S | | | B Y R E L L A C H R I S T E N S E N , P H . D .
1a 1b
1c
It turns out, glazes are the culprits. Glazes used on both e.maxCAD and BruxZir are short-lived andmore