The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 21 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2020 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of the Translucency of Monolithic Zirconia

Shatha A Alshali, Sohil A Kazim, Rashad Nageeb, Hala S Almarshoud

Keywords : Monolithic, Translucency, Zirconia

Citation Information : Alshali SA, Kazim SA, Nageeb R, Almarshoud HS. Comparative Evaluation of the Translucency of Monolithic Zirconia. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (1):51-55.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2735

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-06-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; The Author(s).


Aims and objectives: New techniques are being developed to invent zirconia with high translucency and better esthetics leading to the development of several brands of monolithic zirconia. The aim of this study is to compare the translucency of three brands of zirconia available for the fabrication of monolithic restorations. Materials and methods: An in vitro study was designed to compare the translucency of three brands of zirconia available for the fabrication of monolithic restorations: Zirlux Zirconia (Vivadent Ivoclar), Zenostar Zr Translucent Zirconia (Weiland), and BruxZir Zirconia (Glidewell). All specimens were prepared to 0.5 mm thickness. Thirty zirconia specimens from each material were finished and polished. After drying, specimens were fired according to the manufacturers’ recommendations. A spectrophotometer (Color i5) was used for the translucency test. Each specimen was presented at the view port permitting the light to hit the center of the specimen. Results were saved into the software until all measurements were completed. The data were then transferred to an Excel sheet where translucency parameters were calculated. The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and the post hoc Bonferroni test were performed to analyze the results. Results: The one-way ANOVA test revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between the groups. This study showed lower translucency of BruxZir in comparison to Zenostar and Zirlux when tested under standardized conditions. Conclusion: There is a statistically significant difference in the translucency between the different brands of zirconia available for monolithic restoration fabrication. Clinical significance: Different brands of zirconia have different degrees of translucency. Material selection should be customized in each case.

  1. Griffin Jr JJ. Combining monolithic zirconia crowns, digital impressioning, and regenerative cement for a predictable restorative alternative to PFM. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2013;34(3):212–222.
  2. Spear FM. The metal-free practice: myth? Reality? Desirable goal? J Esthet Restor Dent 2001;13(1):59–67. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2001.tb00252.x.
  3. McLaren E, Giordano R. Ceramics overview: classification by microstructure and processing methods. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2010;31(9):682–684.
  4. Piconi C, Maccauro G. Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial. Biomaterials 1999;20(1):1–25. DOI: 10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00010-6.
  5. Long HA. Monolithic zirconia crowns and bridges. Inside Dent 2012;8(1):60–66.
  6. Wall JG, Cipra DL. Alternative crown systems. Is the metal-ceramic crown always the restoration of choice? Dent Clin North Am 1992;36(3):765–782.
  7. Griffin Jr JD. Tooth in a bag: same-day monolithic zirconia crown. Dent Today 2013;32(1):124, 126-131.
  8. Moving to monolithic. Inside Dental Technology: AEGIS; 2011.
  9. McLaren E. CAD/CAM dental technology. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2011;32(4):73–76.
  10. Strub JR, Rekow ED, Witkowski S. Computer-aided design and fabrication of dental restorations: current systems and future possibilities. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137(9):1289–1296. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0389.
  11. Mitov G, Heintze SD, Walz S, et al. Wear behavior of dental Y-TZP ceramic against natural enamel after different finishing procedures. Dental Mater 2012;28(8):909–918. DOI: 10.1016/
  12. Johnson P. Next generation materials: material developers shape the future direction of the industry. Inside Dental Technology. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2012;3:3.
  13. Sulaiman TA, Abdulmajeed AA, Donovan TE, et al. Optical properties and light irradiance of monolithic zirconia at variable thicknesses. Dent Mater 2015;31(10):1180–1187. DOI: 10.1016/
  14. Heffernan MJ, Aquilino SA, Diaz-Arnold AM, et al. Relative translucency of six all-ceramic systems. Part I: core materials. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88(1):4–9.
  15. Chen YM, Smales RJ, Yip KH, et al. Translucency and biaxial flexural strength of four ceramic core materials. Dent Mater 2008;24(11): 1506–1511. DOI: 10.1016/
  16. Baldissara P, Llukacej A, Ciocca L, et al. Translucency of zirconia copings made with different CAD/CAM systems. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104(1):6–12. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60086-8.
  17. O'Keefe KL, Pease PL, Herrin HK. Variables affecting the spectral transmittance of light through porcelain veneer samples. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66(4):434–438. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(91)90501-m.
  18. Terzioğlu H, Yilmaz B, Yurdukoru B. The effect of different shades of specific luting agents and IPS empress ceramic thickness on overall color. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2009;29(5):499–505.
  19. Uhlmann DR, Bowen HK, Kingery WD. Introduction to ceramics. 1976.
  20. Jiang L, Liao Y, Wan Q, et al. Effects of sintering temperature and particle size on the translucency of zirconium dioxide dental ceramic. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2011;22(11):2429–2435. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-011-4438-9.
  21. Sulaiman TA, Abdulmajeed AA, Donovan TE, et al. The effect of staining and vacuum sintering on optical and mechanical properties of partially and fully stabilized monolithic zirconia. Dent Mater J 2015;34(5):605–610. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2015-054.
  22. Yu B, Ahn JS, Lee YK. Measurement of translucency of tooth enamel and dentin. Acta Odontol Scand 2009;67(1):57–64. DOI: 10.1080/00016350802577818.
  23. Elsaka SE. Optical and mechanical properties of newly developed monolithic multilayer zirconia. J Prosthodont 2019;28(1):e279–e284. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12730.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.