With the continuous advancement of dental technology, the choice of dental restorative materials has become more and more important. Among the many materials, Lava (L**A) and ordinary zirconia have attracted much attention, each of which has its own unique characteristics. This article will delve into the differences between lava and ordinary zirconia in terms of strength, tightness, shrinkage and product performance stability. Through comparative analysis, it provides a more comprehensive reference for clinical practice and technology selection.
1.High strength: the key to protecting the patient's dentin.
The strength of the rava is remarkable, with a pressure of an astonishing 1440MPa, which is much higher than the level of ordinary zirconia. This property allows the use of rava to preserve the patient's dentin as much as possible during tooth preparation, thus reducing the erosiveness to the tooth. In contrast, the general zirconia requires 08mm, while the minimum safe thickness of the rava front teeth is only 03mm, and the back teeth are 05mm, which allows for more flexibility when using rava and helps to better meet clinical needs.
In addition, zirconia products begin to decay after 5 years of use, while the performance of Rava is relatively more stable, which can support more than 10 years of use, and is not prone to problems during the period. This long-term stability provides patients with a more durable and reliable repair option.
2.High degree of cohesion: anti-corrosion, reduce secondary caries.
Under a high-powered microscope, the edge of the rava is rounded and blunt, with low graininess and low surface roughness, which is not easy to corrode. This property helps to reduce the occurrence of secondary caries and improve the durability and stability of the repair. Conversely, the edges of ordinary zirconia may be sharp-shaped, highly grainy, and susceptible to corrosion, increasing the risk of micro-penetration, while also potentially leading to the detachment of the restoration.
The high degree of containment of Rava not only helps to reduce secondary caries, but also effectively reduces the occurrence of microosmosis, improving the biocompatibility and clinical success rate of repair.
3.The shrinkage is small, and the product performance is stable.
In terms of shrinkage, the national standard zirconium block requires the shrinkage rate to be accurate to three decimal places, while the rava zirconium block is more fine, and its shrinkage accuracy even reaches four decimal places. The zirconium powder used in Rava is fine and uniform, and its products show excellent stability during the production process. This makes Rava more reliable in clinical applications and can more accurately meet the requirements of dental restoration.
4.Expansion of application fields: fully meet the needs of patients.
With the continuous development of dental restoration technology, Rava not only performs well in traditional restoration, but also shows broad application prospects in the fields of dental cosmetic and implant restoration. Its high strength, high fit and low shrinkage allow Rava to fully meet the needs of patients for tooth appearance and function.
5.Comparative analysis and conclusions.
In summary, there are significant differences between lava and ordinary zirconia in terms of strength, tightness, shrinkage and product performance stability. Rava has carved out a place in the field of dental restorations with its high strength, high seal, low shrinkage and long-term stability. In practical application, doctors can choose appropriate materials according to the specific situation and repair needs of patients to achieve better clinical results. The advantage of Rawa lies not only in the improvement of the technical level, but also in the expansion of its application in multiple fields, providing patients with more comprehensive repair options. In material selection, understanding the difference between the two materials will help doctors better meet the needs of their patients, improving the quality and long-term results of the restoration.
6.Future development direction: innovation drives medical progress.
With the rapid development of medical technology, Rava and ordinary zirconia are constantly innovating as representative materials of dental restoration. In the future, we can expect more advanced preparation techniques and material design to further improve the performance of these two materials. There may be a new generation of materials with higher strength, better biocompatibility, and longer lifespans.
7.Considerations in Clinical Practice: Individualized Selection.
In practice, doctors need to make personalized choices based on the patient's oral condition, prosthodontic needs, and individual differences. For some patients with higher strength requirements, especially posterior restoration, Rava with high strength may be preferred. For some anterior restorations, where aesthetic requirements are high, Lava's superior fit and fine shrinkage may be more suitable.
8.Conclusion.
Considering the characteristics of lava and ordinary zirconia in terms of strength, tightness, shrinkage and product performance stability, our advantages and disadvantages in different clinical scenarios can be obtained. In the field of dental restoration, the choice of materials is directly related to the patient's best results and the long-term stability of the restoration. Therefore, when choosing materials, doctors need to weigh various factors according to the patient's specific situation to achieve the best repair effect.
Overall, both lava and ordinary zirconia are excellent materials in the current field of dental restoration, each with unique advantages. By gaining a deeper understanding of their differences, physicians are able to more accurately select materials that are appropriate for the patient's situation, providing patients with a safer, longer-lasting repair solution. In the continuous scientific and technological innovation, we also look forward to seeing more excellent dental restorative materials emerge and contribute more to the development of dental medicine.