Fluorescence of natural teeth and restorative materials, methods for analysis and quantification: A literature review

Abstract

Objective This review integrates published scientific information about the fluorescence of natural teeth, dental resins and ceramics, and the main methods of analysis and quantification presented in the literature. Overview Fluorescence is an emission of light (photons) by a substance that has absorbed light of higher energy. In natural teeth, it is more intense in the dentin than in the enamel and presents a bluish‐white color. In dental resins and ceramics, fluorescence is obtained by the incorporation of materials that contain rare‐earth luminescence centers (more precisely lanthanide luminescence centers), which allows these artificial materials to simulate natural teeth in a more beautiful and vital‐looking way. However, the lack of knowledge about this optical phenomenon on the part of professionals indicates the need for more scientific studies and dissemination on this topic. Conclusions Aesthetic materials have variable spectral compositions and fluorescence intensities, which are not always compatible with natural teeth. The fluorescence of teeth and restorative materials can be influenced by several factors, such as aging, temperature, and bleaching. Several devices for fluorescence evaluation and quantification are used in studies under different methodologies, but the small number of studies on the subject make it difficult to compare their results. Clinical Significance Fluorescence is a fundamental optical property for aesthetic rehabilitations since its presence and intensity in the restorative materials allows achieving an aesthetic result much closer to reality. However, the fluorescent behavior of natural teeth and aesthetic restorative materials is not yet fully understood by researchers and clinicians. Greater understanding of this phenomenon will contribute to the selection, indication, and clinical use of these materials.

Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants: a comparative in vitro study

“…Although it is not possible, to date, to determine the trueness and therefore the accuracy of an IOS in vivo, it should not be forgotten that there are important factors that can differentiate the quality of a scan on a plaster model from that of a scan in the patient’s mouth. Variations in measurements between in vitro and in vivo may be important and depend not only on the presence of blood and saliva, but above all on the technical difficulty of the intraoral acquisition, as well as on the patient’s movements and the peculiar optical behavior of dental tissues [30–32]. The teeth, being made of enamel and dentin, have a different optical behavior from that of gypsum models; this does not help the IOS in reading and rebuilding the mesh.…”

Analysis of color and fluorescence of different dentin ceramics and natural human dentin's to enhance shade matching

“…23 Based on this report, and as the Porcelain Fused to Metal (PFM) restorations are commonly used in middle-aged and elderly subjects, the teeth were selected from this age group as the control group. As the dentin fluorescence differs in various parts of the tooth and is higher cervical versus the incisal region, 17 the fluorescence intensity of natural dentin was measured on the middle third of the teeth reported as a mean value.…”

“…[6][7][8][9] It is reported that luminary is a fluorescent material added to dental ceramics to mask and brighten discolored teeth. 10 Although several studies have investigated resin composites' fluorescent properties [11][12][13][14] and dental ceramics, 6,7,[15][16][17] it is unclear which ceramics are the best match with natural teeth in color and fluorescence.…”

Novel Digital Technique to Quantify the Area and Volume of Cement Remaining and Enamel Removed after Fixed Multibracket Appliance Therapy Debonding: An In Vitro Study

“…Additional measurement techniques were described for analyzing the enamel surface alterations after fixed multibracket appliance therapy removal: fluorescence [28], atomic force microscope [18], and optic coherence tomography [22]. The fluorescence measurement visual technique has been widely used to differentiate composite from enamel and for identifying the remaining cement after fixed multibracket appliance therapy removal, due to the luminescent differences between composite resin and tooth structures, but cannot measure the volumes of cement and enamel removed [29,30]. Macroscopic visual techniques have been used to identify enamel surface damage and tooth discolorations related to the remaining cement after fixed multibracket appliance therapy removal [31].…”