Koi Kiyono, Amaya-Pajares Silvia P, Kawashima Satoki, Arora Garima, Ferracane Jack, Watanabe Hidehiko
Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Biosciences-Division of Restorative Dentistry, Oregon Health & Science University-School of Dentistry, Oregon, USA.
Department of Operative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2025 Feb;37(2):456-464. doi: 10.1111/jerd.13291. Epub 2024 Jul 30.
To evaluate the color-match with extracted natural teeth of three single-shade universal composites, a group-shade universal composite, and a highly translucent-shade conventional composite.
Twenty extracted human teeth were divided into light- and dark-shade groups (n = 10, LSG and DSG). A preparation was restored with the 3 single-shade universal composites, OMNICHROMA (OMC), Admira Fusion x-tra U (AFU), and Essentia U (ESU); a highly translucent-shade conventional composite, Tetric EvoCeram T (TEC-T); and two shades of a group-shade universal composite-Filtek Universal Restorative (FUR A1 and A4). Composites were photopolymerized, polished, and stored in water for 24 h. The ΔE value between the unprepared and restored surfaces was obtained using a spectrophotometer. Composite placement and measurements were repeated three times per tooth. Color differences were statistically analyzed with the within-between-subjects t-test and repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by post hoc pairwise comparisons with a Bonferroni adjustment (α = 0.05).
There were no statistically significant differences between OMC and FUR (A1 and A4). AFU and ESU showed significantly higher ΔE values than OMC and TEC-T (p < 0.05). Single-shade composites exhibited significantly higher ΔE values in the DSG than in the LSG except ESU (p < 0.05). None of the composites satisfied the criteria for an acceptable match (ΔE >1.8).
OMC showed the same color matching ability as a group-shade universal composite. A highly translucent-shade conventional composite and OMC exhibited better color matching ability than other single-shade composites. Overall, single-shade universal composites performed better in lighter-shaded teeth.
Single-shade universal composites have the potential to reduce chair time by eliminating shade selection in cavities with lighter-shade teeth. Highly translucent incisal conventional composites also may be used if the appropriate shade of composite is not available.
评估三种单色调通用型复合树脂、一种组色调通用型复合树脂和一种高透明度传统复合树脂与拔除的天然牙的颜色匹配情况。
将20颗拔除的人类牙齿分为浅色调组和深色调组（n = 10，LSG和DSG）。用三种单色调通用型复合树脂OMNICHROMA（OMC）、Admira Fusion x-tra U（AFU）和Essentia U（ESU）；一种高透明度传统复合树脂Tetric EvoCeram T（TEC-T）；以及组色调通用型复合树脂Filtek Universal Restorative的两种色调（FUR A1和A4）对制备体进行修复。复合树脂经光固化、抛光后在水中储存24小时。使用分光光度计获得未制备表面和修复表面之间的ΔE值。每颗牙齿的复合树脂放置和测量重复三次。采用组内组间t检验和重复测量方差分析（ANOVA）对颜色差异进行统计学分析，随后进行Bonferroni校正的事后两两比较（α = 0.05）。
OMC与FUR（A1和A4）之间无统计学显著差异。AFU和ESU的ΔE值显著高于OMC和TEC-T（p < 0.05）。除ESU外，单色调复合树脂在DSG中的ΔE值显著高于LSG（p < 0.05）。没有一种复合树脂满足可接受匹配的标准（ΔE > 1.8）。
OMC显示出与组色调通用型复合树脂相同的颜色匹配能力。高透明度传统复合树脂和OMC的颜色匹配能力优于其他单色调复合树脂。总体而言，单色调通用型复合树脂在浅色调牙齿中表现更好。
单色调通用型复合树脂有可能通过消除浅色调牙齿窝洞中的颜色选择来减少椅旁时间。如果没有合适色调的复合树脂，也可使用高透明度切端传统复合树脂。
