Digital image analysis of fluorescence of ceramic veneers with different ceramic materials and resin cements

Abstract

The objective of this study was to analyze the effect of the type of ceramics and resin cements on the fluorescence of ceramic veneers under the 405 nm UV-light by digital imaging. One hundred and ninety-two veneers were fabricated using three types of ceramics (IPS e.max CAD, IPS Empress CAD, and Zenostar). Eight pieces of substrates were made of resin-nano-ceramic (Lava Ultimate). The level of fluorescence for each sample cemented with the substrate using three kinds of resin cements (RelyX U200, Variolink N, and Choice 2) was analyzed by using histogram data of luminosity from Adobe Photoshop software. Furthermore, the fluorescence values were evaluated by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. The highest fluorescence values were observed for the IPS e.max CAD cemented with Choice 2 cement, followed by IPS Empress CAD, and Zenostar the lowest. The final fluorescence intensity of ceramic veneer is affected by ceramic materials and resin cements.

<i>In-vitro</i> evaluation of wear characteristics, microhardness and color stability of dental restorative CAD/CAM materials

“…Whereas instrumental technique is a more reliable method for the color assessment 20) , which can be performed using image analysis with dental photography or digital shade taking devices such as colorimeter and spectrophotometry. Image analysis [21][22][23] and spectrophotometric analysis [20][21][22][23][24] techniques have been used in several studies previously. In the present study, clinical contact-type spectrophotometer device and image analysis techniques were the two methods used for evaluating the shade selection, quantitatively.…”

“…The digital image analysis method might be considered as a reliable method for the shade selection of dental materials. However, the in vitro studies regarding this topic in the literature are controversial [20][21][22][23] . Anand et al 21) , McLaren et al 22) , Zhang and Yu 23) have considered digital image analysis as a reliable method, whereas Farah 24) also found a good agreement on ΔE* measurements between spectrophotometer and digital image analysis methods, nevertheless spectrophotometer measurements were considered more reliable.…”