Pop-Ciutrila Ioana-Sofia, Colosi Horatiu Alexandru, Dudea Diana, Badea Mandra Eugenia
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Department of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Faculty of General Medicine, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Clujul Med. 2015;88(4):537-44. doi: 10.15386/cjmed-497. Epub 2015 Nov 15.
An accurate color reproduction represents the final validation level of an esthetic anterior or posterior restoration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the color of permanent maxillary incisors, canines and molars, using a clinical spectrophotometer.
The Vita Easyshade Advance 4.0(®) intraoral spectrophotometer was used by one clinician to determine the color of 369 permanent maxillary incisors, canines and molars. The best matches to Vitapan Classical(®) and 3D-Master(®) shade guides were recorded. A one-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare L*, a*, b*, c* and h* color coordinates among the 3 types of teeth. Differences between the mean values of all color coordinates were evaluated by use of Bonferroni corrections. Color difference (ΔE*) between incisors, canines and molars was calculated from ΔL*, Δa* and Δb* data and the results were compared to ΔE*=3.3 acceptability threshold.
Except for Δa* and Δh* between canines and molars, statistically significant differences among the mean differences of all color coordinates were found when the 3 types of teeth were compared by pairs. The most frequently measured shades were A1 (48.4%), respectively 1M1 (31.5%) for incisors, B3 (36.6%), respectively 2M3 (39.8%) for canines and B3 (44.7%), respectively 2M3 (52%) for molars. Incisors had the highest lightness values, followed by canines and molars. Molars were the most chromatic with the highest a* and b* values.
Despite the limitations of this study, color differences among incisors, canines and molars were found to be statistically significant, above the clinical acceptability threshold established. In conclusion, successful esthetic restorations of permanent teeth of the same patient need an individual color assessment and reproduction of every type of tooth.
准确的颜色再现是美观的前牙或后牙修复体的最终验证水平。本研究的目的是使用临床分光光度计评估上颌恒切牙、尖牙和磨牙的颜色。
由一名临床医生使用Vita Easyshade Advance 4.0(®)口腔内分光光度计来确定369颗上颌恒切牙、尖牙和磨牙的颜色。记录与Vitapan Classical(®)和3D-Master(®)比色板的最佳匹配结果。采用单因素方差分析和Kruskal-Wallis检验来比较三种类型牙齿之间的L*、a*、b*、c和h颜色坐标。所有颜色坐标平均值之间的差异通过Bonferroni校正进行评估。根据ΔL*、Δa和Δb数据计算切牙、尖牙和磨牙之间的颜色差异(ΔE*),并将结果与ΔE* = 3.3的可接受阈值进行比较。
除了尖牙和磨牙之间的Δa和Δh外,当对三种类型的牙齿进行两两比较时,所有颜色坐标的平均差异之间均存在统计学上的显著差异。切牙最常测量的色号分别为A1(48.4%),尖牙为B3(36.6%),磨牙为B3(44.7%);切牙对应1M1(31.5%),尖牙对应2M3(39.8%),磨牙对应2M3(52%)。切牙的明度值最高,其次是尖牙和磨牙。磨牙的色彩最丰富,a和b值最高。
尽管本研究存在局限性,但切牙、尖牙和磨牙之间的颜色差异在统计学上具有显著意义,高于既定的临床可接受阈值。总之,对同一患者的恒牙进行成功的美学修复需要对每种类型的牙齿进行单独的颜色评估和再现。