Taylan Sari1, Cagri Ural2, Emir Yüzbasioglu3, Ibrahim Duran4, Seda Cengiz5, Idris Kavut6. 1. Certified Dental Technician, Private practice, İstanbul, Turkey. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. Electronic address: cagriural@omu.edu.tr. 3. Research Fellow, Biomaterials and Translational Dental Research Laboratory, Regenerative and Restorative Medicine Research Center (REMER), Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey; and Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. 5. Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey. 6. Research Assistant, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The final color of a ceramic restoration, especially an ultrathin veneer, is important, but selecting the correct shade is difficult because the substrate can affect the final color of the restoration. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of substrate shade and thickness on the final color of ultrathin laminate veneers milled from feldspathic ceramic and to present a straightforward methodology with which a clinician can visualize the effects of substrate color, ceramic thickness, and prefabricated computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) block color on the final color of the restoration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All specimens were fabricated by slicing CAD-CAM feldspathic ceramic material with a precision cutter into 12×10-mm slices of approximately 0.35, 0.55, 0.75, and 1.55 mm in thickness with 10 different colors (0M1-1M1-1M2-2M1-2M2-2M3-3M1-3M2-3M3-4M1). As a background substrate, composite resin disks (12×10×2 mm) were fabricated with different shades (0M1 S, 1M1 S, 2M3 S, 3M2 S, 4M3 S, 5M3 S). The CIELab values of the polished surfaces of each specimen were measured on a background (white or simulated foundation) with a spectrophotometer by a single experienced operator, and color differences (ΔE) were calculated. Mean ±SD values were calculated and subjected to ANOVA with 2 variables (substrate and ceramic color) (α=.05). RESULTS: Combinations of a lighter substrate shade and a lighter value ceramic restoration and of a darker substrate shade and darker value ceramic restoration only changed the final color of the restoration minimally. CONCLUSIONS: The final color of a dental restoration is affected by the thickness of the restoration, the substrate color, and the ceramic color. Lighter and darker substrate colors show more color changes, and thin veneers cannot mask the substrate color.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The final color of a ceramic restoration, especially an ultrathin veneer, is important, but selecting the correct shade is difficult because the substrate can affect the final color of the restoration. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of substrate shade and thickness on the final color of ultrathin laminate veneers milled from feldspathic ceramic and to present a straightforward methodology with which a clinician can visualize the effects of substrate color, ceramic thickness, and prefabricated computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) block color on the final color of the restoration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All specimens were fabricated by slicing CAD-CAM feldspathic ceramic material with a precision cutter into 12×10-mm slices of approximately 0.35, 0.55, 0.75, and 1.55 mm in thickness with 10 different colors (0M1-1M1-1M2-2M1-2M2-2M3-3M1-3M2-3M3-4M1). As a background substrate, composite resin disks (12×10×2 mm) were fabricated with different shades (0M1 S, 1M1 S, 2M3 S, 3M2 S, 4M3 S, 5M3 S). The CIELab values of the polished surfaces of each specimen were measured on a background (white or simulated foundation) with a spectrophotometer by a single experienced operator, and color differences (ΔE) were calculated. Mean ±SD values were calculated and subjected to ANOVA with 2 variables (substrate and ceramic color) (α=.05). RESULTS: Combinations of a lighter substrate shade and a lighter value ceramic restoration and of a darker substrate shade and darker value ceramic restoration only changed the final color of the restoration minimally. CONCLUSIONS: The final color of a dental restoration is affected by the thickness of the restoration, the substrate color, and the ceramic color. Lighter and darker substrate colors show more color changes, and thin veneers cannot mask the substrate color.
Authors: Catalina Serna-Meneses; Gabriel Ocampo-Parra; Santiago Arango-Santander; Claudia Garcia-Garcia; Luis Felipe Restrepo-Tamayo; Johnatan Cardona-Jimenez; Alexander Ossa; Alejandro Pelaez-Vargas Journal: Int J Dent Date: 2022-06-06
Authors: Gollshang Ahmad Mhammed Dalloo; Bestoon Mohammed Faraj; Abdulsalam Rasheed Al-Zahawi Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Sorin Gheorghe Mihali; Dan Lolos; George Popa; Anca Tudor; Dana Cristina Bratu Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 3.748