Comparison of light-transmittance in dental tissues and dental composite restorations using incremental layering build-up with varying enamel resin layer thickness

Maia, Rodrigo Rocha; Oliveira, Dayane Carvalho Ramos Salles de; D'Antonio, Tracy; Qian, Fang; Skiff, F.

doi:10.5395/rde.2018.43.e22

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the enamel shade layer was placed, in which a standardized thickness of 1.1 mm was obtained by using a dentin spacer, as illustrated in Figure 1 ( 3 , 4 ). The enamel shade was light-cured for 20 seconds from the buccal side and 20 seconds from the lingual side (Valo Cordless, 1000 mW/cm2, Ultradent®, South Jordan, UT, United States) ( 12 , 13 , 14 ). Then, after removing the dentin spacer, the dentin layer was applied right above the cured enamel layer, with a transparent plastic cable attached in the back.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Color difference between the vita classical shade guide and composite veneers using the dual-layer technique

Floriani¹,

Brandfon²,

Sawczuk³

et al. 2022

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the color difference between the Vita Classical Shade Guide and composite veneers using the dual-layer technique. Material and Methods Thirty samples were fabricated using a custom-made mold (Easy Layering Shade Guide Kit, 3M) using two resin composites: Filtek Supreme Ultra (3M); and Estelite Omega (Tokuyama) (n=3). The composite veneers were made by layering the different enamel and body or dentin shades from each composite. The color measurements were taken using a spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade V®, Vita Zahnfabrik). The ΔE00 between the Vita Classical Shade Guide (Vita Zahnfabrik) and the composite veneers were calculated using the CIEDE2000 formula. Results For the composite veneers using Filtek Supreme Ultra, the best match for A1 Vita shade was achieved layering either EA1 with DA2 or DA3; EA2 with DA1 or DA2 (ΔE00= 1.53 ~ 1.96 ± 0.4). For A2 Vita shade the best match would be EA3 with DA3 or EA3 with DA2 (ΔE00= 1.40 ~ 1.85 ± 0.1); or for A3 Vita shade the best match would be EA3 with DA2 2.50±(0.6). For the composite veneers using Estelite Omega, the were no best match for neither A1, A2 or A3 Vita shade (ΔE00> 2.5). Conclusions The combination of enamel and dentin shades from Filtek Supreme Ultra provided acceptable color match for A1, A2 and A3 shades from the Vita Shade Guide, while Estelite Omega did not provide acceptable color match for any of the Vita Shade Guide standard shades tested. Key words: Color, color matching, optical properties, resin composite, layering.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Color difference between the vita classical shade guide and composite veneers using the dual-layer technique

Floriani¹,

Brandfon²,

Sawczuk³

et al. 2022

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering the differences in the formulation of commercial composites, it is not easy to establish the reason for this variation (there might be multiple reasons, indeed). All components of the composite ( e.g ., photoinitiator, filler particles) can interfere with the optical properties of the restorative material, and even the monomer blend can probably interfere in the final shade of the composite, making the shade selection even more difficult [ 4 5 19 20 21 22 ]. This can be even more problematic when the shade guide and composite manufacturers are not the same, as was the case with Vitapan, since this standard of shade may not match with the composite of several manufacturers, as occurred in the present study, in which shades A3, B1, and C3 presented significant differences for all manufacturers, corroborating the findings of a previous investigation [ 11 17 23 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides, in an in vitro study, the background used for reading the sample does not vary, as occurs in clinical situations. Moreover, the modulation of the layers of enamel and dentin shades with different thicknesses can influence the aesthetic features of restorative composite restorations [ 9 20 24 ]. The fact that the samples have the same thickness and shape as the shade guide pattern may have evidenced these differences since this makes it possible to standardize the optical behavior concerning the guide highlighting the characteristics of each composite.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Manufactures try to optimize and improve light transmittance through composite resin by changing and modifying organic matrix chemistry and morphological properties of fillers ( 26 ). As the dental composites are heterogeneous substances, the passing light is scattered at the resin-filler interface due to the differences in the refractive indices of the individual compounds ( 28 , 29 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Light Attenuation through Dental Tissues on Cure Depth of Composite Resins

Sartori¹,

Knežević²,

Peruchi³

et al. 2019

Acta Stomatol Croat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Polymerization of light-cured resin-based materials is well documented; however, the intensity of the activating light can be reduced by passage through air, dental structure, or restoration compromising the physical properties of the restoration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the depth of cure of different light cured composite resins polymerized directly or transdental, through enamel and enamel/dentin tissues. Material and methods Five composite resins were selected for this experiment: SureFil SDR, Dentsply (SDR), Filtek Supreme Plus, 3M ESPE (FSP), Aelite LS, Bisco (ALS), Filtek LS, 3M ESPE (FLS), and TPH, Dentsply (TPH). Thirty specimens of each material were prepared with 2- or 4-mm thickness. The specimens were light-cured (Elipar 2500, 3M ESPE) for 40 sec using three different protocols: direct or transdental, through a disc of enamel with 1 mm of thickness, and a disc of enamel and dentin with 2 mm of thickness. Eight Vickers microhardness (VH) measurements were taken from each specimen, four on top and four on bottom surface (Micromet, Buehler, 100 g per 15 sec). Data was analyzed with ANOVA three-way, Tukey HSD post-hoc (α = .05). Results Bottom surfaces of specimens exhibited statistically significant lower Vickers microhardness than the top surfaces for all composite resin evaluated, regardless of the curing conditions, except for the SDR when direct light-cured. Transdental light curing through enamel/dentin layer, significantly decreased VH (P<0.05) on the bottom surface of all composite groups. Conclusion The results of this study showed that light-curing attenuation of dental structures negatively affect the micro-hardness of composite resins.

show abstract

Comparison of light-transmittance in dental tissues and dental composite restorations using incremental layering build-up with varying enamel resin layer thickness

Cited by 10 publications

References 18 publications

Color difference between the vita classical shade guide and composite veneers using the dual-layer technique

Color difference between the vita classical shade guide and composite veneers using the dual-layer technique

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

Effects of Light Attenuation through Dental Tissues on Cure Depth of Composite Resins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About