Silorane, ormocer, methacrylate and compomer long-term staining susceptibility using ΔE and ΔE 00 colour-difference formulas
|Published in||Odontology. 2016, vol. 104, no. 3, p. 305-309|
|Abstract||The aim of this study was to evaluate the staining susceptibility of a silorane (Filtek Silorane), an ormocer (Ceram X Duo), a methacrylate (Tetric EvoCeram) and a compomer (Dyract) exposed on the long term to various staining agents by using ΔE and ΔE 00 colour-difference formulas. Thirty-six disc-shaped specimens were made of each of the four chemically different materials, randomly divided in six groups (n = 6) and immersed in five staining solutions (red wine, juice, coke, tea and coffee) or stored dry (control) in an incubator at 37 °C for 99 days. Spectrophotometric measurements by means of a spectrophotometer (Spectroshade Handy Dental, MHT) were repeated over a white (L* = 92.6, a* = -1.2, b* = 2.9) and black (L* = 1.6, a* = 1.2, b* = -1.0) background made of plasticized paper, in order to determine the colour changes according to ΔE, ΔE 00 and translucency formulas. Statistical analysis was performed by means of factorial Anova, Fisher's LSD test (post hoc) and a Spearman rank correlation between ΔE and ΔE 00. When analysed over a white background, mean ΔE 00 values were highly significantly different and varied from 0.8 (Ceram X Duo/air) to 20.9 (Ceram X Duo/red wine). When analysed over a black background, mean ΔE 00 values were highly significantly different and varied from 1.0 (Ceram X Duo and Tetric/air) to 25.2 (Ceram X Duo/red wine). Differences in translucency varied from 0.3 (Ceram X Duo/air) to 21.1 (Ceram X Duo/juice). The correlation between ΔE and ΔE 00 over a white background was 0.9928, while over a black background, it was 0.9886.|
This document has no fulltext available yet, but you can contact its author by using the form below.
|Research group||Groupe Krejci Ivo (médecine dentaire) (240)|
|GREGOR, Ladislav et al. Silorane, ormocer, methacrylate and compomer long-term staining susceptibility using ΔE and ΔE 00 colour-difference formulas. In: Odontology, 2016, vol. 104, n° 3, p. 305-309. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:75877|