Prapatsorn Chongkavinit1, Chuchai Anunmana2. 1. Graduate student, Master of Science in Implant Dentistry, Dental Implant Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Electronic address: chuchai.anu@mahidol.edu.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: High-translucency ceramics can be influenced by the underlying structure, altering the restoration shade. How this affects color matching is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the optical effects of cement shade, ceramic type, ceramic thickness, and abutment material on the final color of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) ceramic restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two shades of resin cement (yellow, translucent), 3 types of background (titanium, white zirconia, yellow zirconia), and 3 types of high-translucent ceramic (each type shade A1 and A3) were used in this study. For the experimental groups, a total of 72 ceramic specimens were produced across 4 groups based on ceramic thickness (1.0 mm, 1.5 mm, and 2.0 mm). For the control groups, each ceramic type and shade was prepared at a thickness of 4 mm. A total of 8 resin cement specimens were produced in 4 groups based on shade by using a plastic mold (12×12×0.2 mm). To demonstrate the effect of implant abutment materials, 3 types of background were fabricated with a thickness of 2 mm. For the experimental groups, 3 specimens (ceramic, cement, and background) were sequentially placed with glycerin in the center of each background specimen. Color measurements of the experimental groups were made with a spectrophotometer and recorded in the Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage Lab coordinate system. The color differences (ΔE) between experimental and control groups were then calculated. The Kruskal-Wallis test (α=.05) was used to analyze the multiple comparisons of ceramic thickness, ceramic type, and abutment material. The Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05) was used to analyze cement shade. RESULTS: Significant differences were found for different ceramic thicknesses, ceramics types, and abutment materials (P≤.001). A clinically acceptable shade (ΔE≤3) was found in 1.5- and 2.0-mm ceramics with the titanium and 2.0-mm ceramics with the yellow zirconia background. However, the color between the experimental group and the control group was similar when using the 2 cement shades (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in ceramic thickness could minimize alteration of the final shade. High-translucency ceramics, together with a resin cement, were able to successfully mask titanium with a ceramic thickness of at least 1.5 mm. However, only a ceramic with a thickness of 2.0 mm was able to mask the yellow zirconia background.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: High-translucency ceramics can be influenced by the underlying structure, altering the restoration shade. How this affects color matching is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the optical effects of cement shade, ceramic type, ceramic thickness, and abutment material on the final color of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) ceramic restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two shades of resin cement (yellow, translucent), 3 types of background (titanium, white zirconia, yellow zirconia), and 3 types of high-translucent ceramic (each type shade A1 and A3) were used in this study. For the experimental groups, a total of 72 ceramic specimens were produced across 4 groups based on ceramic thickness (1.0 mm, 1.5 mm, and 2.0 mm). For the control groups, each ceramic type and shade was prepared at a thickness of 4 mm. A total of 8 resin cement specimens were produced in 4 groups based on shade by using a plastic mold (12×12×0.2 mm). To demonstrate the effect of implant abutment materials, 3 types of background were fabricated with a thickness of 2 mm. For the experimental groups, 3 specimens (ceramic, cement, and background) were sequentially placed with glycerin in the center of each background specimen. Color measurements of the experimental groups were made with a spectrophotometer and recorded in the Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage Lab coordinate system. The color differences (ΔE) between experimental and control groups were then calculated. The Kruskal-Wallis test (α=.05) was used to analyze the multiple comparisons of ceramic thickness, ceramic type, and abutment material. The Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05) was used to analyze cement shade. RESULTS: Significant differences were found for different ceramic thicknesses, ceramics types, and abutment materials (P≤.001). A clinically acceptable shade (ΔE≤3) was found in 1.5- and 2.0-mm ceramics with the titanium and 2.0-mm ceramics with the yellow zirconia background. However, the color between the experimental group and the control group was similar when using the 2 cement shades (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in ceramic thickness could minimize alteration of the final shade. High-translucency ceramics, together with a resin cement, were able to successfully mask titanium with a ceramic thickness of at least 1.5 mm. However, only a ceramic with a thickness of 2.0 mm was able to mask the yellow zirconia background.