Banner Portal
Color variation of composite resins in relation to the Vita Classical shade guide
PDF

Keywords

Composite resin
Color
Spectrophotometry

How to Cite

1.
Denadai JVA, Zimmer R, Reston EG, Arossi GA. Color variation of composite resins in relation to the Vita Classical shade guide: colorimetric analysis. Braz. J. Oral Sci. [Internet]. 2024 Mar. 10 [cited 2024 Jun. 14];23(00):e240869. Available from: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8670869

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to verify the color variation between different composite resins and the Vita Classical Shade Guide. Methods: Two-millimeter thickness samples were made (n = 6) from eight commercial brands of composite resin (shade A2): Charisma (Kulzer), Forma (Ultradent), Harmonize (Kerr), Luna (SDI), Opallis (FGM), Oppus Bulk Fill (FGM), Vittra (FGM) and Filtek Z250 XT (3M ESPE). Specimens were stored in distilled water for 7 days and then polished. Color measurements of samples and A2 shade of the Vita Classical Shade Guide were performed using the Vita Easy Shade Advance 4.0 spectrophotometer on a black background. Color variations were calculated using the CIEDE2000 formula, considering values ≥0.81 being noticeable by the human eye and ≥1.77 being clinically unacceptable. Results were statistically analyzed with a 5% significance level. Results: Color variation (ΔE) of composite (E1 ) compared to the Vita Classical Shade Guide (E0 ) was greater than clinically acceptable for all the materials evaluated in this study. Forma (ΔE=2.08 ± sd=0.47) and Filtek Z250 XT (2.50 ± 0.20) had the smallest amount of color variation values found in the results. Harmonize (3.32 ± 0.63) presented values similar to Filtek Z250 XT, but it was worse than Forma. Vittra (3.51 ± 0.28), Charisma (3.80 ± 0.20), Opallis (4.24 ± 0.30) and Luna (5.67 ± 0.20) did not differ among each other and presented higher color variation than Forma, Filtek Z350XT and Harmonize. Oppus Bulk Fill (13.94 ± 1.12) was the composite with the greatest color variation. Conclusions: The findings in this study show that attention should be taken when using the Vita Color Shade Guide for composite shade selection.

https://doi.org/10.20396/bjos.v23i00.8670869
PDF

References

Joiner A. Tooth colour: a review of the literature. J Dent. 2004;32 Suppl 1:3-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2003.10.013.

Battersby PD, Battersby SJ. Measurements and modelling of the influence of dentine colour and enamel on tooth colour. J Dent. 2015 Mar;43(3):373-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.11.003.

Manuel ST, Abhishek P, Kundabala M. Etiology of tooth discoloration - a review. Nig Dent J. 2010;18(2):56-63.

Fugolin APP, Pfeifer CS. New Resins for Dental Composites. J Dent Res. 2017 Sep;96(10):1085-1091. doi: 10.1177/0022034517720658.

Lee YK. Translucency changes of direct esthetic restorative materials after curing, aging and treatment. Restor Dent Endod. 2016 Nov;41(4):239-245. doi: 10.5395/rde.2016.41.4.239.

Alshiddi IF, Richards LC. A comparison of conventional visual and spectrophotometric shade taking by trained and untrained dental students. Aust Dent J. 2015 Jun;60(2):176-81. doi: 10.1111/adj.12311.

Park JH, Lee YK, Lim BS. Influence of illuminants on the color distribution of shade guides. J Prosthet Dent. 2006 Dec;96(6):402-11. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.10.007.

Cho BH, Lim YK, Lee YK. Comparison of the color of natural teeth measured by a colorimeter and Shade Vision System. Dent Mater. 2007 Oct;23(10):1307-12. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.008.

Kalantari MH, Ghoraishian SA, Mohaghegh M. Evaluation of accuracy of shade selection using two spectrophotometer systems: Vita Easyshade and Degudent Shadepilot. Eur J Dent. 2017 Apr-Jun;11(2):196-200. doi: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_195_16.

Luo MR, Cui G, Rigg B. The development of the CIE 2000 colour-difference formula: CIEDE2000. Color Res Appl. 2001;26(5):340–50. doi: 10.1002/col.1049.

Liberato WF, Barreto IC, Costa PP, de Almeida CC, Pimentel W, Tiossi R. A comparison between visual, intraoral scanner, and spectrophotometer shade matching: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Feb;121(2):271-275. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.004.

Carney MN, Johnston WM. Appearance Differences Between Lots and Brands of Similar Shade Designations of Dental Composite Resins. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017 Apr;29(2):E6-E14. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12263.

Pecho OE, Pérez MM, Ghinea R, Della Bona A. Lightness, chroma and hue differences on visual shade matching. Dent Mater. 2016 Nov;32(11):1362-1373. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.08.218.

Paravina RD, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ, Bona AD, Igiel C, Linninger M, et al. Color difference thresholds in dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;27 Suppl 1:S1-9. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12149.

Pecho OE, Ghinea R, Alessandretti R, Pérez MM, Della Bona A. Visual and instrumental shade matching using CIELAB and CIEDE2000 color difference formulas. Dent Mater. 2016 Jan;32(1):82-92. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.10.015.

Gómez-Polo C, Portillo Muñoz M, Lorenzo Luengo MC, Vicente P, Galindo P, Martín Casado AM. Comparison of the CIELab and CIEDE2000 color difference formulas. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Jan;115(1):65-70. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.07.001.

Pérez MM, Della Bona A, Carrillo-Pérez F, Dudea D, Pecho OE, Herrera LJ. Does background color influence visual thresholds? J Dent. 2020 Nov;102:103475. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103475.

Pecho OE, Ghinea R, Perez MM, Della Bona A. Influence of Gender on Visual Shade Matching in Dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017 Apr;29(2):E15-E23. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12292.

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 Dec;25(12):1564-8. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.07.011.

Kim JC, Yu B, Lee YK. Influence of surface layer removal of shade guide tabs on the measured color by spectrophotometer and spectroradiometer. J Dent. 2008 Dec;36(12):1061-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.09.004.

Suh YR, Ahn JS, Ju SW, Kim KM. Influences of filler content and size on the color adjustment potential of nonlayered resin composites. Dent Mater J. 2017 Jan 31;36(1):35-40. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2016-083. Erratum in: Dent Mater J. 2018;37(6):1023.

Lim YK, Lee YK, Lim BS, Rhee SH, Yang HC. Influence of filler distribution on the color parameters of experimental resin composites. Dent Mater. 2008 Jan;24(1):67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.007.

Miranda DA, Marçal YLV, Proba FP, Moreira TLP, Ferraz LN, Aguiar FHB. Color correspondence of different brands and composite resin systems in relation to the Vita Classical scale through spectrophotometry. Dent Oral Craniofac Res. 2018;5(1):1-4. doi: 10.15761/DOCR.1000279.

Salgado VE, Rego GF, Schneider LF, Moraes RR, Cavalcante LM. Does translucency influence cure efficiency and color stability of resin-based composites? Dent Mater. 2018 Jul;34(7):957-966. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2018.03.019.

de Abreu JLB, Sampaio CS, Benalcázar Jalkh EB, Hirata R. Analysis of the color matching of universal resin composites in anterior restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021 Mar;33(2):269-276. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12659.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2024 João Vitor Andrade Denadai, Roberto Zimmer, Eduardo Galia Reston, Guilherme Anziliero Arossi

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.