4.5 Review

Bioactive and inert dental glass-ceramics

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.35923

关键词

glass-ceramic; dental; mechanical properties; biomedical

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2013/07793-6, 2015/13314-9]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The global market for dental materials is predicted to exceed 10 billion dollars by 2020. The main drivers for this growth are easing the workflow of dentists and increasing the comfort of patients. Therefore, remarkable research projects have been conducted and are currently underway to develop improved or new dental materials with enhanced properties or that can be processed using advanced technologies, such as CAD/CAM or 3D printing. Among these materials, zirconia, glass or polymer-infiltrated ceramics, and glass-ceramics (GCs) are of great importance. Dental glass-ceramics are highly attractive because they are easy to process and have outstanding esthetics, translucency, low thermal conductivity, high strength, chemical durability, biocompatibility, wear resistance, and hardness similar to that of natural teeth, and, in certain cases, these materials are bioactive. In this review article, we divide dental GCs into the following two groups: restorative and bioactive. Most restorative dental glass-ceramics (RDGCs) are inert and biocompatible and are used in the restoration and reconstruction of teeth. Bioactive dental glass-ceramics (BDGCs) display bone-bonding ability and stimulate positive biological reactions at the material/tissue interface. BDGCs are suggested for dentin hypersensitivity treatment, implant coating, bone regeneration and periodontal therapy. Throughout this paper, we elaborate on the history, processing, properties and applications of RDGCs and BDGCs. We also report on selected papers that address promising types of dental glass-ceramics. Finally, we include trends and guidance on relevant open issues and research possibilities. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 105A: 619-639, 2017.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据