Optical properties of contemporary monolithic CAD‐CAM restorative materials at different thicknesses

Gunal, Burcu; Ulusoy, Mutahhar

doi:10.1111/jerd.12382

Cited by 50 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(121 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…IPS e.max CAD has a statistically significantly higher translucency parameter than VITA ENAMIC with a reported mean of 26.0 ±0.6 and 16.0 ±0.6, respectively. (17,18) Although, as recommended by the manufacturers of both materials, a high translucency (HT) block was used for VITA ENAMIC and a low translucency (LT) block was used for IPS e.max CAD, the visible translucency of IPS e.max CAD was still higher.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pink and white esthetic scores of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network and lithium disilicate implant hybrid abutment crowns: Randomized clinical trial

Elrifaie

Elbasty

Naguib

2020

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pink and white esthetic scores of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network and lithium disilicate implant hybrid abutment crowns: Randomized clinical trial

Elrifaie

Elbasty

Naguib

2020

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…16,17 The final color of ceramic restoration is a result of several interacting factors; ceramic thickness and translucency, substrate color and the thickness and color of the cement. 18,19,20,21,22 Since the typical thickness of a veneer is usually much larger than the cement thickness, the degree of veneer translucency was found to be more effective in masking the underlying discolored substrate than the luting agent shade. 23 Inspite of the well documented color modifying effect of luting cements, several authors agree that the choice of cement color has less of an effect on the final color of restorations.…”

Section: The Effect Of Thickness and Degree Of Translucency On The Fimentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of thickness and degree of translucency on the final color of lithium disilicate veneers

Nossair

2019

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statement of problem: Achieving lighter final shades of A1 and BL1 with lithium disilicate veneers and the impact of different lithium disilicate translucencies and thickness on the final color is unclear. Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of different translucencies and thicknesses of lithium disilicate on the final shade of veneers. Materials and methods: Eighty lithium disilicate specimens were fabricated from two translucencies of lithium disilicate blocks(IPS e.max CAD blocks, Ivoclar Vivadent); HT high translucency(HT) and low translucency (LT), in two different shades; A1 and BL1, and with 4 different thicknesses; 0.3mm, 0.5mm, 0.7mm, and 0.9mm. The discs were placed on an A3 shade composite substrate with a 0.1 mm translucent resin cement. ΔE values were recorded to determine color differences between the specimens and the standard A1 and BL1 color parameters. ΔE values were directly recorded with a handheld spectrophotometer (Easyshade Advance) The ΔE values were compared with an acceptability threshold (ΔE=3.7). Two-way ANOVA, and the Bonferroni test were used to analyze data (α=.05). Results: The changes in both thickness and translucency showed high significance. For A1 shade, the 0.9 mm LT showed the least mean ΔE value while the highest mean value was obtained by 0.9 mm HT. For BL1 shade, The 0.9 mm HT samples showed the least mean ΔE value while the highest mean value was obtained by 0.3 mm LT samples. Conclusions: The thickness and the translucency of lithium disilicate affected its final color. A minimum of 0.5 mm thickness of LT lithium disilicate was able to produce a clinically acceptable A1 shade. Achieving BL1 final shade was not possible with both HT lithium disilicate and LT lithium disilicate in thicknesses up to 0.9mm.

show abstract

“…In overcoming the drawbacks of the lithium disilicate, zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic (Vita Suprinity ® ) was introduced in 2015. According to the manufacturer, this new glass-ceramic is enhanced with zirconia, thereby combining the mechanical properties of zirconia with the esthetic characteristic of glassceramic [12,13]. This restorative material is reported to mask the background color of the core material relative to zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This restorative material is reported to mask the background color of the core material relative to zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramics. Furthermore, they possess numerous advantages, such as long-term reliability, high load-bearing capacity, ease of milling and polishing, and excellent translucency, fluorescence, and opalescence [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of thickness and background on the color changes of CAD/CAM dental ceramic restorative materials

Alfouzan

Al-Otaibi

Labban

et al. 2020

Mater. Res. Express

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to compare the effect of thickness and background on the color changes of CAD/ CAM materials (zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Suprinity), lithium disilicate (IPS E-max CAD), and hybrid ceramic (Enamic)). Twelve specimens for each thickness (0.4 mm, 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 1.5 mm, and 2 mm) were obtained by sectioning three CAD/CAM materials. A spectrophotometer was used to measure the color change of the specimens against different backgrounds (A2 enamel, A4 dentin, gray, and metal) using the CIELab color space system. Analysis of variance, sample t-test, and posthoc multiple comparison tests were used to evaluate and compare the color changes for different material types, thicknesses, and background colors, with a significance level of P0.05. The result demonstrated that material type, the thickness of the material, and the color of the background had a significant effect on ΔE (P=0.000). Regardless of the material thickness, Suprinity had the highest mean ΔE values (5.4±1.9), and E-max had the lowest mean ΔE values (1.1±0.6). At 2 mm thickness, Enamic presented the lowest ΔE values (0.5±0.5) against the A2 background. The 0.5 and 1 mm specimens corresponded to the highest ΔE values, whereas the 1.5 and 2 mm thickness specimens predominantly gave the lowest ΔE values. All the independent factors, including the type and thickness of the material, and color of the background, contributed significantly to ΔE of the tested materials (P0.05). The study confirms the high masking ability of the lithium disilicate (Emax) material. In clinical situations where the color of the core needs to be masked, it is recommended to use lithium disilicate (E-max).

show abstract

Optical properties of contemporary monolithic CAD‐CAM restorative materials at different thicknesses

Cited by 50 publications

References 46 publications

Pink and white esthetic scores of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network and lithium disilicate implant hybrid abutment crowns: Randomized clinical trial

Pink and white esthetic scores of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network and lithium disilicate implant hybrid abutment crowns: Randomized clinical trial

The effect of thickness and degree of translucency on the final color of lithium disilicate veneers

Influence of thickness and background on the color changes of CAD/CAM dental ceramic restorative materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About