Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

  • 제46권4호
  • /
  • Pages.60.1-60.8
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 2234-7658(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-7666(eISSN)
대한치과보존학회 (The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Spectrophotometric evaluation of restorative composite shades and their match with a classical shade guide

  • 투고 : 2020.12.28
  • 심사 : 2021.03.17
  • 발행 : 2021.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objectives: The aim of this study was to verify the match between 5 shades of composites from different manufacturers with a shade guide and among the systems using a portable spectrophotometer. Materials and Methods: Shade measurements were performed on specimens of Z350 XT (3M ESPE), Charisma Diamond (Heraeus Kulzer GmbH), Esthet X-HD (Dentsply Caulk), and Empress Direct (Ivoclar-Vivadent) for shades A1, A2, A3, B1, and C3 using a Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer (Vita Zahnfabrik) against a white background. Corresponding shades of Vitapan Classical (Vita Zahnfabrik) guide were measured likewise and shade variation (ΔE) was calculated based on International Commission on Illumination L*a*b* parameters. The ΔE of the composites in each shade was compared by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc test (α = 0.05). Results: All composites presented ΔE > 3.7 compared with the shade guide. Variation in shades A3, B1, and C3 was significantly different for all composites. ΔE of Z350 XT was significantly lower for A1 than for the other shades, whereas ΔE of Z350 XT and Charisma Diamond were significantly lower for A2 than for the other shades. Conclusions: No composite shade matched with the shade guide. Equivalent shades of the restorative composite from different manufacturers may show clinically noticeable ΔE.

키워드

과제정보

The authors are grateful to Dentsply Caulk, Heraeus Kulzer, 3M ESPE, and Ivoclar Vivadent for the donation of the composites used in this study.

참고문헌

  1. Glockner K, Glockner K, Haiderer B. Visual vs. spectrophotometric methods for shade selection. Coll Antropol 2015;39:801-802.
  2. Miyajiwala JS, Kheur MG, Patankar AH, Lakha TA. Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: a clinical evaluation. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2017;17:273-281. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_342_16
  3. Bergen SF, McCasland J. Dental operatory lighting and tooth color discrimination. J Am Dent Assoc 1977;94:130-134. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1977.0264
  4. Kim BJ, Lee YK. Influence of the shade designation on the color difference between the same shade-designated resin composites by the brand. Dent Mater 2009;25:1148-1154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.04.001
  5. Lee YK, Yu B, Lee SH, Cho MS, Lee CY, Lim HN. Shade compatibility of esthetic restorative materials--A review. Dent Mater 2010;26:1119-1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.08.004
  6. Browning WD, Contreras-Bulnes R, Brackett MG, Brackett WW. Color differences: polymerized composite and corresponding Vitapan Classical shade tab. J Dent 2009;37(Supplement 1):e34-e39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.05.008
  7. Lehmann KM, Igiel C, Schmidtmann I, Scheller H. Four color-measuring devices compared with a spectrophotometric reference system. J Dent 2010;38(Supplement 2):e65-e70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.006
  8. Oh WS, Koh IW, O'Brien WJ. Estimation of visual shade matching errors with 2 shade guides. Quintessence Int 2009;40:833-836.
  9. Paolone G, Orsini G, Manauta J, Devoto W, Putignano A. Composite shade guides and color matching. Int J Esthet Dent 2014;9:164-182.
  10. Swift EJ Jr, Hammel SA, Lund PS. Colorimetric evaluation of vita shade resin composites. Int J Prosthodont 1994;7:356-361.
  11. Igiel C, Lehmann KM, Ghinea R, Weyhrauch M, Hangx Y, Scheller H, Paravina RD. Reliability of visual and instrumental color matching. J Esthet Restor Dent 2017;29:303-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12321
  12. Yilmaz B, Irmak O, Yaman BC. Outcomes of visual tooth shade selection performed by operators with different experience. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;31:500-507. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12507
  13. Barutcigil C, Harorli OT, Yildiz M, Ozcan E, Arslan H, Bayindir F. The color differences of direct esthetic restorative materials after setting and compared with a shade guide. J Am Dent Assoc 2011;142:658-665. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2011.0249
  14. Hassel AJ, Doz P, Nitschke I, Rammelsberg P. Comparing L*a*b* color coordinates for natural teeth shades and corresponding shade tabs using a spectrophotometer. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22:72-74.
  15. Kim HS, Um CM. Color differences between resin composites and shade guides. Quintessence Int 1996;27:559-567.
  16. Paravina RD, Kimura M, Powers JM. Color compatibility of resin composites of identical shade designation. Quintessence Int 2006;37:713-719.
  17. Sampaio CS, Gurrea J, Gurrea M, Bruguera A, Atria PJ, Janal M, Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Hirata R. Dental shade guide variability for hues B, C, and D using cross-polarized photography. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2018;38:s113-s118.
  18. Nakhaei M, Ghanbarzadeh J, Amirinejad S, Alavi S, Rajatihaghi H. The influence of dental shade guides and experience on the accuracy of shade matching. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17:22-26. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1797
  19. Alvim HH, Alecio AC, Vasconcellos WA, Furlan M, de Oliveira JE, Saad JR. Analysis of camphorquinone in composite resins as a function of shade. Dent Mater 2007;23:1245-1249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.002
  20. Rocha Maia R, Oliveira D, D'Antonio T, Qian F, Skiff F. Comparison of light-transmittance in dental tissues and dental composite restorations using incremental layering build-up with varying enamel resin layer thickness. Restor Dent Endod 2018;43:e22.
  21. Salgado VE, Albuquerque PP, Cavalcante LM, Pfeifer CS, Moraes RR, Schneider LF. Influence of photoinitiator system and nanofiller size on the optical properties and cure efficiency of model composites. Dent Mater 2014;30:e264-e271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.05.019
  22. Azzopardi N, Moharamzadeh K, Wood DJ, Martin N, van Noort R. Effect of resin matrix composition on the translucency of experimental dental composite resins. Dent Mater 2009;25:1564-1568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.07.011
  23. Chu SJ, Trushkowsky RD, Paravina RD. Dental color matching instruments and systems. Review of clinical and research aspects. J Dent 2010;38(Supplement 2):e2-e16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.001
  24. Elgendy H, Maia RR, Skiff F, Denehy G, Qian F. Comparison of light propagation in dental tissues and nano-filled resin-based composite. Clin Oral Investig 2019;23:423-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2451-9
  25. Gulamali AB, Hemmings KW, Tredwin CJ, Petrie A. Survival analysis of composite Dahl restorations provided to manage localised anterior tooth wear (ten year follow-up). Br Dent J 2011;211:E9.
  26. Moura FR, Romano AR, Lund RG, Piva E, Rodrigues Junior SA, Demarco FF. Three-year clinical performance of composite restorations placed by undergraduate dental students. Braz Dent J 2011;22:111-116. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402011000200004
  27. Wolff D, Kraus T, Schach C, Pritsch M, Mente J, Staehle HJ, Ding P. Recontouring teeth and closing diastemas with direct composite buildups: a clinical evaluation of survival and quality parameters. J Dent 2010;38:1001-1009.